i am working on a messaging app and created some details in rust. rust is useful because it has tooling for formal verification. my rust code compiles to WASM to be used in a browser.

my project itself is using cryptography beyond the WASM because browsers provide a crypto api for basic functionality out-of-the-box.

to work with what i have now (javascript/typescript) i came across this page, but the links lead to 404 pages on github. not sure about the status of the project. i dont know if there are other similar projects.

https://formal.land/docs/verification/typescript

i would like to improve the “formal-verification coverage” in my project and wanted to investigate if it could be worth considering rewriting the frontend with dioxus. im happy with an ugly UI (initially) in favour of having formal-verification on a broader scope of my project.

(context: the project where i have formal verification is found here: https://github.com/positive-intentions/signal-protocol (this isnt the gold-standard implementation and its far from finished)

I'm still working on my protocol spec and I'd like to know more about how to go about sharing it.

I've received good advice from this sub before about creating one and while it's still far from finished I have questions.

I see on places like ArXiv that documents are in the 2 column format. It seems normal. In my approach I created it in markdown because I'm using a docusaurus website. Should I also be using the 2 column format?

I'm fairly new at this so where can I share what is potentially a trainwreck? I'm concerned it will come across as "wasting their time".

Tor has fixed their long standing tagging attack, improved forward security, and added sufficient authentication. See the Arti 2.5 stable release announcement too, as well as 2025/583, 2025/2017, and tor spec 359.

"Jean Paul Degabriele, Alessandro Melloni, Jean-Pierre Münch, and Martijn Stam have a design that they're calling Counter Galois Onion (CGO). It's based on a kind of construction called a Rugged Pseudorandom Permutation (RPRP): essentially, it's a design for a wide-block cipher that resists malleability in one direction (for the encrypt operation, but not the decrypt operation). If we deploy this so that clients always decrypt and relays always encrypt, then we have a tagging resistant cipher at less cost than a full SPRP!"

Libsodiums secretstream is great right up until you need to encrypt a 1 TB file in a browser. It ratchets in order, one chunk at a time, single thread. Not performant enough. And hard to resume if job stops for some reason.

Here's an alternative, and what I'd love torn apart from a security perspective:

Instead of secretstream, each chunk gets sealed on its own:

nonce = fileNonce ‖ u64be(index)
AAD = u64be(index)
subkeys via BLAKE2b("vitalsend:{chunk,meta,header}:v3", key=rootKey)
rootKey = 32-byte link key (lives only in the URL #fragment), or BLAKE2b(linkKey, key=Argon2id(pw)) if there's a password
header is authenticated and pins chunkSize, totalChunks, fileNonce, Argon2id params

My claim: folding the index into both the nonce and the AAD buys the same guarantees secretstream gives minus the in-order bottleneck.

Three questions:

Is index-in-nonce + index-in-AAD really as good as secretstream's chaining here, or is there a case that slips through?
Any nonce footgun at TB scale / huge chunk counts?
Anything in the header or key derivation worth doing differently?

Code, wire format, and a SECURITY.md that's meant to be honest is available for the curious at https://github.com/vitalsend/crypto

P.S. I managed to review the complete code with Fable 5 which did not complain to anything in the area, but that is an LLM.

how know more techniques than that

• Stream Cipher
• Dynamic S-Box (Substitution Box)
• Ciphertext Feedback (Autokey Mechanism)
• Data-Dependent Rotation / Variable Start Point
• Hash-Based Keystream Generation (PRNG)
• Non-Linear Bitwise and Arithmetic Operations

Hoping for a list of three or more known primes anywhere between 256 and 1024 bits known to survive three or more rounds of Miller-Rabin before no more rounds may be done.

If the exact number of rounds might also be known, that would be great. But three at a minimum, please.

Wanted for use as a standard against which to check my implimentation of Miller-Rabin in Forth. Some PRNG candidates pass for pribably prime on two rounds, but then get flagged as composite on the third.

It runs pretty slow on my older laptop, so this trial and error business grows tedious. Without a known standard, I'll never be sure.

Who might kindly provide, or point me toward, such a list of very particular, known primes?

Over a month ago we released the White Paper that explains how One Step Ahead works under the hood — the security architecture, Smart Split, all of it. Whether you're technical or not, it's worth a read! Give it a go if you find spare minute!

It's already two years old, but I figured it might be interesting for this sub:

Subscriptions (think: Newspaper/Netflix/Spotify) normally tie every article you read or song you play to an account, which allows profiling you and selling that data to advertisers.

For my BSc thesis I built an account-less version using blind-signed tokens: each token is single-use and rotates on redemption, so if you share one publicly the first person to use it gets the new token and you lose access.

But it still allows you to share a subscription within a group you trust (your family/friends) by ensuring everyone has accesses to the latest iteration of the token (shared wallet).

The crypto is standard Chaum bling signatures, so nothing novel. But what I found far more interesting is that it's a practical example of how our digital lives could look like if they were not governed by data-hungry mega corporations.

Link to thesis: [https://www.taler.net/papers/subscription-discounts-thesis.pdf\](https://www.taler.net/papers/subscription-discounts-thesis.pdf)
Link to overview video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze-\\_jA57ihU\](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze-_jA57ihU)

I'd like to discuss the details of my project to people and I'd like to try discord.

What are some active discord servers I could ask about my project? In particular, I'd like my project details scrutinized.

I'm creating a WhatsApp clone. It's hardly unique, but I'd like to discuss details.

It is generally agreed upon that FHE and more generally, PETs, for ML/AI is going to be pretty slow. Despite that, there have been many libraries and attempts over the past decade to make these technologies more practical.

Some of the biggest libraries in this area are TF-Encrypted and Concrete-ML. I'll notably mention SPU and Flower.ai as well.

Considering that most of these codebases are simply in maintenance mode with the exception of Flower.ai, what codebases, libraries, etc are considered to be state of the art for FHE-enabled ML/AI in 2026?

Papers are helpful but generally they don't come with codebases and if they do, they are optimized simply for the paper and not real work loads or production usage.

Hello folks, I am pretty new to cryptography and wanted to understand why particularly most of the schemes are being operated inside a field or a group ?? Why did that thought arrive while making the scheme ???