Subject: RE: Comments on updated X9.42 draft

From: Robert Zuccherato <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 15:53:34 -0500

I have one further comment on the X9.42 draft.  Presently it states:
> X9.42 requires that the private key x be in the interval [2^(m-1) + 1,
> (q - 2)]. 
> 
The latest (ballot) version of X9.42 actually only requires that private
keys be in the interval [2, q-2].  Restricting the key space to
[2^(m-1)+1, (q-2)] only results in a smaller key space, which is
(slightly) easier to attack.  There is no reason to restrict it like
this.

	Robert.

---

From: EKR <[email-masked]>
Date: 08 Nov 1998 20:39:58 -0800

> (slightly) easier to attack.  There is no reason to restrict it like
Works for me.

I took that restriction directly from an X9.42 draft. I'm perfectly
happy to relax it.
-Ekr

-- 
[Eric Rescorla                                   [email-masked]]