You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi, guys.
Recently, I have been confused about the secparam in the class PairingGroup.
I knew that the security parameter ($\lambda$) can decide the security level of a system in theory.
However, when I passed different values like -1, 0.5, 7, 512, and 1024 to create a PairingGroup object, I found there seemed to be no differences in time or communication costs in cryptography schemes.
Moreover, I have searched the secparam in codes related to PairingGroup and only found messageSize involves the variable secparam.
Thus, I am confused about the role the Python parameter secparam plays in the class PairingGroup and whether it makes sense to pass values like -1, 0.5, and 7 both in theoretical cryptography schemes and practical Python charm library-related implementations.
By the way, if the secparam is limited to positive integers in __init__, it may be better to use >> 3 instead of / 8 in messageSize.
Thanks & regards.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, guys.$\lambda$ ) can decide the security level of a system in theory.
Recently, I have been confused about the
secparam
in the classPairingGroup
.I knew that the security parameter (
However, when I passed different values like
-1
,0.5
,7
,512
, and1024
to create aPairingGroup
object, I found there seemed to be no differences in time or communication costs in cryptography schemes.Moreover, I have searched the
secparam
in codes related toPairingGroup
and only foundmessageSize
involves the variablesecparam
.Thus, I am confused about the role the Python parameter
secparam
plays in the class PairingGroup and whether it makes sense to pass values like-1
,0.5
, and7
both in theoretical cryptography schemes and practical Python charm library-related implementations.By the way, if the
secparam
is limited to positive integers in__init__
, it may be better to use>> 3
instead of/ 8
inmessageSize
.Thanks & regards.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: