# RFC Errata

Found 1 record.

## Status: Held for Document Update (1)

### RFC 2412, "The OAKLEY Key Determination Protocol", November 1998

Source of RFC: ipsec (sec)
Errata ID: 3960

**Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT**

Reported By: Daniel Kahn Gillmor

Date Reported: 2014-04-11

Held for Document Update by: Stephen Farrell

Date Held: 2014-05-08

Section 2.8 & Appx E says:

Section 2.8: [...] In order to maximize this, one can choose "strong" or Sophie Germaine primes, P = 2Q + 1, where P and Q are prime. However, if P = kQ + 1, where k is small, then the strength of the group is still considerable. These groups are known as Schnorr subgroups, and they can be found with much less computational effort than Sophie-Germaine primes. [...] [...] For Sophie Germain primes, if the generator is a square, then there are only two elements in the subgroup: 1 and g^(-1) (same as g^(p-1)) which we have already recommended avoiding. Appendix E: [...] The primes are chosen to be Sophie Germain primes (i.e., (P-1)/2 is also prime), to have the maximum strength against the square-root attack on the discrete logarithm problem.

It should say:

Section 2.8: [...] In order to maximize this, one can choose safe primes, P = 2Q + 1, where P and Q are prime. However, if P = kQ + 1, where k is small, then the strength of the group is still considerable. These groups are known as Schnorr subgroups, and they can be found with much less computational effort than safe primes. [...] [...] For safe primes, if the generator is a square, then there are only two elements in the subgroup: 1 and g^(-1) (same as g^(p-1)) which we have already recommended avoiding. Appendix E: [...] The primes are chosen to be safe primes (i.e., (P-1)/2 is also prime), to have the maximum strength against the square-root attack on the discrete logarithm problem.

Notes:

This is a terminology clarification.

For primes P and Q related such that P = 2Q + 1, P is a "safe prime" and Q is a "Sophie Germain prime" The draft gets this definition backward. The draft also suggests that "strong" primes are equivalent to Sophie Germain primes, which is not necessarily the case.

Section 2.8 also misspells "Germain" with an extra e at the end twice.

see for example: http://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/1996-65-213/S0025-5718-96-00670-9/S0025-5718-96-00670-9.pdf