Talk:Optimal asymmetric encryption padding

Untitled

I don't know too much about this subject, so I can't expand it, maybe someone else can? Maybe after I finish my paper about RSA :) 13:32, 6 October 2005 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.100.146.218 (talk • contribs)

Hmm, yeah, what I don't get is: If this is a block cypher, how come the recipient can read the message after decrypting it with private RSA key? Is the y of the trapdoor-function submitted within the encrypted content? - 62.206.74.26 09:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

SVG by Inkscape seems to loose the arrow ends on lines. That's annoying. --Ozga (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. This has been listed here for ages now, and the request for evidence that a violation of WP:NCCAPS is justified has not been met. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 23:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

---

Optimal asymmetric encryption padding → Optimal Asymmetric Encryption Padding – This is a very specific implementation of optimal asymmetric encryption padding and it's even capitalized in the article text itself Relisted. BDD (talk) 17:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC) Olathe (talk) 14:50, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• Can you confirm that this meets WP:NCCAPS? People tend to over-capitalize phrases that are referred to with initialisms; see Talk:Amusement with prize. --BDD (talk) 17:32, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose per NCCAPS absent evidence. Even if this article is about one implementation of OAEP, as long as there's a broader topic to discuss, the article should have a wider scope anyway. --BDD (talk) 17:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Update the OAEP standardization covered by this page.

The OAEP standard indicated by this page (PKCSv1.5, I believe) is outdated and replaced by the PKCSv2.2 standard. The page should update to reflect this. The new standard allows for authentication using a secret string, prefixes with 0x00 (which affords some message>modulus protection), and has the nonce and padded message portions reversed, among other changes. See the link below for details. 100.2.188.182 (talk) 05:48, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

References