13:29:04 <nickm> #startmeeting
13:29:04 <MeetBot> Meeting started Wed Oct 21 13:29:04 2015 UTC.  The chair is nickm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:29:04 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
13:29:07 <nickm> hello tor friends!
13:29:14 <Yawning> hi
13:29:24 <dgoulet> hi
13:29:25 <nickm> 8 weekdays left in october!
13:29:38 <nickm> I'm going a bit crazy
13:29:45 <nickm> and all will be okay; 8 days is plenty
13:30:32 <nickm> status: I'm trying to get all the sponsor U stuff done.  I did the DoS stuff at a first draft level, and am doing a second patch before I make it public.  Andrea's helping with one of the proposals, and writing one of her own.  I'm pretty happy with dev doc status, and worried about guard stuff....
13:30:53 <nickm> ...though isis and athena  are both interested in the guard stuff so that's a good sign
13:31:00 <nickm> also trying to put 0.2.7.4-rc out today.
13:31:06 <nickm> first I'm trying to squash all the leaks in master
13:31:09 <nickm> so many leaks
13:31:10 <Yawning> is it just a pile of docs that needs to be done?
13:31:31 <nickm> mostly design documentation,
13:31:44 <nickm> with the main coding being a prototype guard algorithm implementation
13:32:13 <athena> hi meeting!
13:32:16 <nickm> (to force us to say what our best idea for a guartd algorithm is.  Could be in python if we can test its behavior.
13:32:19 <nickm> hi athena !
13:32:37 <nickm> and if I get all this stuff done, I'll be a happy person and find some other nice thing to do.  probably more code review for folks.
13:32:42 <nickm> who's next with a status?
13:34:33 <nickm> would it work better if I just start picking people?
13:35:16 <nickm> Yawning: how's it going with you?
13:37:04 <Yawning> ok, gonna go back to my eternal battle with documentation
13:37:23 <Yawning> and start trying to wrap my head around what needs to be done in 0.2.8
13:37:50 <Yawning> at least there's light at the end of the irl distraction tunnel some time
13:37:57 <nickm> I'm expecting that battle to not be repeated.  we're gonna have to do more pt evaluations, but the plan there is Don't Make Yawning Do 'Em.
13:38:14 <Yawning> I'll do em if needed
13:38:17 <nickm> unless you secretly love doing pt evaluations
13:38:20 <Yawning> because someone has to
13:38:36 <nickm> sure, but if we diversify who _can_ do them, we can use you for more stuff
13:38:40 <nickm> and you can have more fun
13:38:53 <nickm> I am in docs hell this month and it's not as much fun as I'd hoped
13:40:13 <nickm> anything else?  any docs stuff we can help you with?
13:40:55 <Yawning> think I'm good
13:41:01 <nickm> ok. athena ?
13:41:04 <Yawning> I will scream in panic if I belive otehrwise
13:44:35 <dgoulet> so for me, I'm in recovery mode of a wrist issue, but since last week I've done mostly prop#250 code (it's working, we are able to have a shared random value within the consensus), I've done few things related to HS also, I still plan to do some code review by the end of october for 027 stable
13:45:24 <nickm> cool.  is the proposal on tor-dev/ in tor-spec up to date?
13:46:18 <dgoulet> nickm: the tor-spec one needs some changes but minor, it will be up to date by the time we submit the code for review
13:46:37 <dgoulet> and asn is working on the one for the ed25519 shared random key
13:47:20 <nickm> neat!
13:47:31 <nickm> one helpful thing to do when you put the code for review...
13:47:36 <athena> status: we have an apparently-functional DoS filter for dirauths at last (ticket #4581); i'm still doing some unit tests, tweaking the default parameters and trying to make a proposal for sponsorU out of it
13:47:47 <nickm> is to review other big patches.  I am WAY behind. (
13:47:49 <nickm> :(
13:48:05 <nickm> athena: cool!  The proposal is the part that would be an end-of-month deliverable
13:48:15 <nickm> did you have a chance to read the thing I set yesterday btw?
13:50:12 <athena> nickm: will read this afternoon
13:50:17 <nickm> thanks!
13:50:31 <nickm> Any feedback  you can give to help me finish it up would rock
13:51:01 <nickm> I know you've thought about this at least as much as I have
13:51:11 <nickm> (the doc is a proposal for refactoring and hiding authorities)
13:52:45 <nickm> anybody else with a status today?
13:52:54 <nickm> if not, do we have anything for discussion?
13:55:11 <isis> oh meetings!  i can actually attend them now because they are at a sane time!
13:55:19 <nickm> because DST shifted?
13:55:28 <nickm> wait no that makes no sense
13:55:31 <nickm> because you moved?
13:55:32 <isis> it did?
13:55:37 <isis> because i moved
13:55:46 <nickm> one more reason for everybody to leave the west coast
13:55:59 <nickm> isis: hi!  want to drop a quick status update for us?
13:56:37 <isis> i started working on #17261 yesterday, and i expect that tomorrow i should have something to send into #tor-dev
13:57:23 <nickm> rocking!
13:57:26 <isis> i also realised that this paper:
13:57:28 <isis> https://github.com/isislovecruft/library/blob/master/cryptography%20%26%20mathematics/post-quantum%20cryptography/A%20Quantum-Safe%20Circuit-Extension%20Handshake%20for%20Tor%20(2015)%20-%20Schanck%2C%20Whyte%2C%20Zhang.pdf
13:57:49 <isis> has an implementation: https://github.com/NTRUOpenSourceProject/ntru-tor
13:58:05 <isis> and mostly for kicks i was taking a look at it
13:58:07 <Yawning> kinda
13:58:24 <isis> there's something wrong with it?
13:58:25 <Yawning> it does the handshake stuff, but not the part that's annoying which is oversized cells
13:58:34 <Yawning> unless they changed the code
13:58:40 <isis> ah, i see, because the NTRU keys are huge
13:58:45 <Yawning> also IIRC it uses the ref implementation
13:58:46 <Yawning> of NTRU
13:58:53 <Yawning> which needs changes iirc
13:59:04 <isis> yep
13:59:33 <isis> i don't think the code should be merged, obviously, but i was impressed that they actually wrote up the code and published it
14:00:26 <isis> and that is about all i've accomplished this week because i'm in the process of moving
14:00:52 <nickm> I think you also looked at my aez silliness
14:01:07 <isis> ah yes, i need to finish that email
14:01:56 <isis> nickm: your proposal is far from silly, but the AEZ security proof as i mentioned is rather scary
14:02:17 <isis> the proposal actually seems fine
14:02:43 <nickm> There's a funny quote in the spec about their proof
14:03:04 <isis> the "anti-easy" part? :)
14:03:19 <nickm> From their Table of Properties for AEZ
14:03:32 <nickm> "Proofs" : "Either: Yes, there are proofs, but then a heuristic optimization is applied to a provablysecure
14:03:35 <nickm> scheme to get a nice speedup; or No, there are no proofs for AEZ itself, although
14:03:38 <nickm> the authors employ provable-security to motivate and justify some design choices"
14:04:54 <isis> err… i suppose that was humour, yes :)
14:05:09 <nickm> well, I thought it was funny
14:05:14 <isis> it made me puke in my mouth a little at the phrase "employ provable-security"
14:05:15 <isis> :)
14:05:59 <nickm> really it should be "we proved that something else is secure!  Alternatively, under a dubious counterfactual, this is provably secure!"
14:06:08 <isis> but it does sound quite funny now that i realise it's probably sarcasm
14:06:26 <nickm> My guess is that they wrote just one of those sentences in an earlier draft
14:06:55 <nickm> huh. I guessed wrong.
14:07:04 <nickm> the v1 draft says: "Either: Yes, there are proofs, but then a heuristic optimization is applied to a provablysecure
14:07:07 <nickm> scheme to get a nice speedup; or Yes, there are proofs, but under a nonstandard
14:07:08 <nickm> assumption; or No, there are no proofs for AEZ itself, although the authors employ
14:07:11 <nickm> provable-security to motivate and justify design choices."
14:08:45 <nickm> ok, drifting.  Thanks, all!
14:08:47 <nickm> #endmeeting