From 0ba8d97c8aa4c6fe3d8c200f4f8e2470401f20da Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joseph Kiniry Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:16:39 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Removed extra 's'. --- docs/ProgrammingCryptol/classic/Classic.tex | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/ProgrammingCryptol/classic/Classic.tex b/docs/ProgrammingCryptol/classic/Classic.tex index ceea8b60..c38b11d2 100644 --- a/docs/ProgrammingCryptol/classic/Classic.tex +++ b/docs/ProgrammingCryptol/classic/Classic.tex @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ inverses of each other. To check the correctness of an \emph{implementation} $I$ of a cryptographic function $C$ means that one must show that the implementation $I$ behaves as the specification ($C$) stipulates. In -the context of cryptography, the minimal conformance necesssary is +the context of cryptography, the minimal conformance necessary is that $I$'s output \emph{exactly} conforms to the output characterized by $C$. But just because a cryptographic implementation is \emph{functionally correct} does not mean it is \emph{secure}. The