3 Removing not relevant part.
source | link

Can't comment, reputation not high enough. I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See: http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement... Ed25519 is more than a curve, it also specifies deterministic key generation among other things (ege.g. hashing) , worth keeping in mind. This is a frustrating thing about DJB implementations, as it happens, as they have to be treated differently to maintain interoperability.

Can't comment, reputation not high enough. I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement... Ed25519 is more than a curve, it also specifies deterministic key generation among other things (eg hashing) , worth keeping in mind. This is a frustrating thing about DJB implementations, as it happens, as they have to be treated differently to maintain interoperability.

I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See: http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement... Ed25519 is more than a curve, it also specifies deterministic key generation among other things (e.g. hashing) , worth keeping in mind. This is a frustrating thing about DJB implementations, as it happens, as they have to be treated differently to maintain interoperability.

2 added 275 characters in body
source | link

Can't comment, reputation not high enough. I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement... Ed25519 is more than a curve, it also specifies deterministic key generation among other things (eg hashing) , worth keeping in mind. This is a frustrating thing about DJB implementations, as it happens, as they have to be treated differently to maintain interoperability.

Can't comment, reputation not high enough. I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement...

Can't comment, reputation not high enough. I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement... Ed25519 is more than a curve, it also specifies deterministic key generation among other things (eg hashing) , worth keeping in mind. This is a frustrating thing about DJB implementations, as it happens, as they have to be treated differently to maintain interoperability.

1
source | link

Can't comment, reputation not high enough. I was under the impression that Curve25519 IS actually safer than the NIST curves because of the shape of the curve making it less amenable to various side channel attacks as well as implementation failures. See http://safecurves.cr.yp.to

Ed25519 has the advantage of being able to use the same key for signing for key agreement (normally you wouldn't do this). I am not well acquainted with the mathematics enough to say whether this is a property of it being an Edwards curve, though I do know that it is converted into the Montgomery coordinate system (effectively into Curve25519) for key agreement...