I'm considering posting a design of a proof-of-work system here and asking a few questions about it, but in the FAQ, it specifically states that you do not want questions about "cryptanalysis of a system".

What sort of more specific question could I ask about it that would make it acceptable? I keep thinking asking what sort of attacks could still be run on it or what principles am I missing in the system (since I'm not a cryptographer at all and have almost no experience in these things besides what I've picked up from others) would still count as "full peer-review".

share
    
I later realized that my question fell under the category of "protocol design". But still, the question holds. –  Joe Z. Dec 27 '12 at 4:07
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

That clause is against people inventing their own primitives, typically classical ciphers. New classical ciphers created by beginners aren't interesting, and evaluating a new modern primitive is far too much work for a question.

If you designed a proof of work system building on standard primitives that should be acceptable. We have plenty of nice questions where people designed their own higher level schemes. If the scope is too broad, it helps to ask specific questions about certain security properties of the scheme, instead of a full evaluation.

share
    
Thanks. So it's [mostly] primitives I'd need to watch out for? That's good. My question doesn't invent new primitives. –  Joe Z. Dec 25 '12 at 15:50
    
The question in question is now here: crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/5830/… –  Joe Z. Dec 26 '12 at 20:32
add comment

For the record, the FAQ doesn't say what you seem to think it says.

We're not interested in questions from an amateur who has invented a new homebrew encryption algorithm and challenges us to cryptanalyze it; those questions are rarely of interest to the Crypto.SE audience. However, if you have a question that's likely to be of broad interest to "software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography", then give it a try.

share
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .