[COSE] ML-DSA & SLH-DSA for JOSE and COSE

[Orie Steele <[e-mail]>]

Hello Post Quantum Enthusiasts,

We apologize for allowing the drafts to expire, that has now been corrected.

We've published new versions and done a tooling migration to the COSE WG
GitHub repository:

- https://github.com/cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-dilithium
- https://github.com/cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus

Here is a quick summary of what changed, but of course you can see the full
diff in the datatracker.

1. We adjusted the names to reflect FIPS.204 (IPD) and FIPS.205 (IPD)
2. We removed extraneous text on the details of the algorithms, which is
better covered in the references noted above.
3. We provided skeletons for examples

We are seeking implementations of ML-DSA and SLH-DSA in order to update the
examples sections, with closer to real world data.

We have opted not to migrate Falcon, the parameter sets for sphincs will
probably keep us busy for a while.

I'd like to take this opportunity to complain a bit about this part of the
FIPS 205 IPD:

" This standard approves 12 parameter sets for use with SLH-DSA. "

I feel this is a mistake, and wonder if there is any opportunity to reduce
this to something less than 4x the number defined by ML-DSA.

Even if NIST preserves all 12, we don't have to register all 12 in
draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus.

... I really don't want to have to generate 12 key pairs and signature
examples, especially because a single key pair with the required line
breaks is likely to be longer than the entire draft.

Of course, we will do whatever the working group thinks is correct here...
what should we do?

Regards,

OS

-- 


ORIE STEELE
Chief Technology Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://transmute.industries>