[CFRG] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7539 (8274)

Madison Church <mchurch@staff.rfc-editor.org> Thu, 06 February 2025 18:50 UTC

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51\))
From: Madison Church <mchurch@staff.rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20250130135232.871051BAAF2@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 12:50:23 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8E9739BE-CC81-473E-BE91-46D35F0B555F@staff.rfc-editor.org>
References: <20250130135232.871051BAAF2@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
To: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
Message-ID-Hash: F5AX2A7Z2PJZNO3KOWLWLFWW54EUG4L5
CC: irsg@irtf.org, cfrg@irtf.org, alina.obst@bsi.bund.de, agl@google.com, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Precedence: list
Subject: [CFRG] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7539 (8274)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/dSrPLSIVIduPEgIBW_0LbkZ-aPM>

Hi Colin,

The RPC reviews editorial errata for all streams per a decision in 2021. If the RPC cannot handle a particular editorial erratum, we ask for review from the appropriate stream.

We have encountered such a case with this erratum and have thus changed the Type to “Technical”. As Stream Approver, please review and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/) Also note that this RFC has been obsoleted by  RFC 8439.

You may review the report at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8274

Information on how to verify errata reports can be found at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/

Further information on errata can be found at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php

Thank you,
RFC Editor/mc

> On Jan 30, 2025, at 7:52 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7539,
> "ChaCha20 and Poly1305 for IETF Protocols".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8274
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Alina Obst <alina.obst@bsi.bund.de>
> 
> Section: 2.3.2
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> ChaCha state with the key setup.
> 
>       61707865  3320646e  79622d32  6b206574
>       03020100  07060504  0b0a0908  0f0e0d0c
>       13121110  17161514  1b1a1918  1f1e1d1c
>       00000001  09000000  4a000000  00000000
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> ChaCha state with the key setup.
> 
>       61707865  3320646e  79622d32  6b206574
>       03020100  07060504  0b0a0908  0f0e0d0c
>       13121110  17161514  1b1a1918  1f1e1d1c
>       01000000  09000000  4a000000  00000000
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Section 2.3 says: "A 32-bit block count parameter, treated as a 32-bit little-endian integer". In Section 2.3.2 the initial block counter is set to 1 which is 00000001 in big-endian hex. So I think, the corresponding entry in the state matrix (index 12) should be 01000000.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it 
> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC7539 (draft-irtf-cfrg-chacha20-poly1305-10)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : ChaCha20 and Poly1305 for IETF Protocols
> Publication Date    : May 2015
> Author(s)           : Y. Nir, A. Langley
> Category            : INFORMATIONAL
> Source              : Crypto Forum Research Group
> Stream              : IRTF
> Verifying Party     : IRSG

[CFRG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7539 (8274) RFC Errata System
[CFRG] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7539 (8… Madison Church