<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Dear Asmus,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Until the standards are not in place – yes, IETF, ICANN and bunch of other places, but UASG is not a place for that.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>We don’t need to defend Chinese script or raise awareness on Chinese ideograms vs emoji. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Personally, I am not happy with RFC on EAI, which is the main topic here, but I am not ready to discuss it here. Instead, I was debating with creators of relevant RFCs about my concerns. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Therefore, I think it’s not a topic for us, not yet (if ever).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Dusan<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'> UA-discuss [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Asmus Freytag<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 12, 2018 5:50 PM<br><b>To:</b> ua-discuss@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [UA-discuss] Fwd: Re: base1024 encoding using Unicode emojis<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p>The reason I forwarded the message below is that many people find something<br>familiar and accessible about emoji and will not understand why there<br>should be more security concerns about them than about a bunch<br>of bewilderingly similar and complex Chinese ideographs or a bunch<br>of "dawn-of-time-emoji" aka Hieroglyphics, both of which are PVALID.<o:p></o:p></p><p>That means that some consciousness-raising needs to happen somewhere<br>and fast.<o:p></o:p></p><p>A./<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><br>On 3/12/2018 9:41 AM, Asmus Freytag wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p>We generally think of emoji as a poor choice for reliable identifiers.<o:p></o:p></p><p>Which makes this discussion on the public unicode mailing list somewhat interesting.<o:p></o:p></p><p>A./<o:p></o:p></p><p>PS: the discussion is archived <a href="https://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2018-m03/0075.html">https://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2018-m03/0075.html</a><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><br>-------- Forwarded Message -------- <o:p></o:p></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0><tr><td nowrap valign=top style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal align=right style='text-align:right'><b>Subject: <o:p></o:p></b></p></td><td style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>Re: base1024 encoding using Unicode emojis<o:p></o:p></p></td></tr><tr><td nowrap valign=top style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal align=right style='text-align:right'><b>Date: <o:p></o:p></b></p></td><td style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:11:09 +0900<o:p></o:p></p></td></tr><tr><td nowrap valign=top style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal align=right style='text-align:right'><b>From: <o:p></o:p></b></p></td><td style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>Martin J. Dürst via Unicode <a href="mailto:unicode@unicode.org"><unicode@unicode.org></a><o:p></o:p></p></td></tr><tr><td nowrap valign=top style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal align=right style='text-align:right'><b>Organization: <o:p></o:p></b></p></td><td style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>Aoyama Gakuin University<o:p></o:p></p></td></tr><tr><td nowrap valign=top style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal align=right style='text-align:right'><b>To: <o:p></o:p></b></p></td><td style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>Keith Turner <a href="mailto:keith@deenlo.com"><keith@deenlo.com></a><o:p></o:p></p></td></tr><tr><td nowrap valign=top style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal align=right style='text-align:right'><b>CC: <o:p></o:p></b></p></td><td style='padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>unicode Unicode Discussion <a href="mailto:Unicode@unicode.org"><Unicode@unicode.org></a><o:p></o:p></p></td></tr></table><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><pre>On 2018/03/12 02:07, Keith Turner via Unicode wrote:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>> Yeah, it certainly results in larger utf8 strings. For example a sha256<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> hash is 112 bytes when encoded as Ecoji utf8. For base64, sha256 is 44<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> bytes.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> Even though its more bytes, Ecoji has less visible characters than base64<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> for sha256. Ecoji has 28 visible characters and base64 44. So that makes<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> me wonder which one would be quicker for a human to verify on average?<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> Also, which one is more accurate for a human to verify? I have no idea. For<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> accuracy, it seems like a lot of thought was put into the visual uniqueness<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>> of Unicode emojis.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Using emoji to help people verify security information is an interesting <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>idea. What I'm afraid is that even if emoji are designed with <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>distinctiveness in mind, some people may have difficulties distinguish <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>all the various face variants. Also, while emoji get designed so that <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>in-font distinguishability is high, the same may not apply across fonts <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>(e.g. if one has to compare a printed version with a version on-screen).<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Regards, Martin.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>>> 2018-03-11 6:04 GMT+01:00 Keith Turner via Unicode <a href="mailto:unicode@unicode.org"><unicode@unicode.org></a>:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>>>> I created a neat little project based on Unicode emojis. I thought<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>> some on this list may find it interesting. It encodes arbitrary data<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>> as 1024 emojis. The project is called Ecoji and is hosted on github<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>> at <a href="https://github.com/keith-turner/ecoji">https://github.com/keith-turner/ecoji</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>>>> Below are some examples of encoding and decoding.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>>>> $ echo 'Unicode emojis are awesome!!' | ecoji<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>> <span style='font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol",sans-serif'>🐦😱🔫🤜👢🔥🇮🐾💎🗓🔯🚜👖🚢🐙🌩💮🔪🎨🤚👥📤🌈📑</span><o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>>>> $ echo <span style='font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol",sans-serif'>🐦😱🔫🤜👢🔥🇮🐾💎🗓🔯🚜👖🚢🐙🌩💮🔪🎨🤚👥📤🌈📑</span> | ecoji -d<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>> Unicode emojis are awesome!!<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>>>> I would eventually like to create a base4096 version when there are more<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>>>> emojis.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre></div></blockquote><p><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br />
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
<tr>
<td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 13px;"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;" /></a></td>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 12px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Virus-free. <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link" target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"> </a></div></body></html>