Re: [Crypto-panel] Request for review: draft-ribose-openpgp-oscca-01

Dear colleagues,

The review has been posted to the CFRG mailing list.

P.S.: Ronald, I'll be happy to make an additional review after you finish
updating the SM2 I-D with design rationale and a summary of published
analysis results. Nevertheless, I've included my own summary of the
published results of SM2 to my review.

Best regards,
Stanislav

2017-11-29 21:24 GMT+03:00 Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com>:

> Hi Stanislav,
>
> Fully understand. Thank you again for your help!
>
> Ron
>
> _____________________________________
>
> Ronald Tse
> Ribose Inc.
>
> +=========================================================+
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information.  If you are not the addressee or authorized to
> receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy,
> disclose or take any action based on this message or any
> information herein.  If you have received this message in
> error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail
> and delete this message.  Thank you for your cooperation.
> +=========================================================+
>
> On Nov 29, 2017, at 9:23 PM, Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <smyshsv@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Ronald,
>
> Thank you very much for the links!
> The review is conducted by Crypto Review Panel, thus the analysis is being
> done more from the cryptographic perspective, and the current state of the
> analysis of the proposed mechanisms is taken into account.
>
> Best regards,
> Stanislav
>
>
> 2017-11-28 19:28 GMT+03:00 Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com>:
>
>> Dear Stanislav,
>>
>> You are absolutely right. Here are the IETF drafts of SM2, SM3 and SM4
>> (they are referred to within this draft, too):
>>
>> SM2: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shen-sm2-ecdsa-02
>> SM3: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-oscca-cfrg-sm3-02
>> SM4: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ribose-cfrg-sm4-05
>>
>> The SM3 and SM4 drafts contain both a design rationale and a
>> cryptanalysis section. Specifically, the cryptanalysis section contain
>> bibliography references with links to research publications of the latest
>> cryptanalysis results (English + Chinese). Most of these results are freely
>> available in English (Google Scholar).
>>
>> As a matter of fact, we are currently updating the SM2 draft to provide
>> the same level of detail as the other two.
>>
>> I’d just like to clarify that the current review is purely on the OpenPGP
>> side of things. That said, we have previously requested a CFRG review of
>> the SM4 draft too, so if you have some time to review that draft, it would
>> be even more awesome :-)
>>
>> Hope this helps!
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Ron
>>
>> _____________________________________
>>
>> Ronald Tse
>> Ribose Inc.
>>
>> On Nov 29, 2017, at 12:08 AM, Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <smyshsv@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ronald,
>>
>> Since the document is dedicated to the algorithms and elliptic curve
>> parameters, it would be very helpful if you could point at papers with
>> their analysis in English, if some of them are not publicly available (or
>> could not be easily found via public resources). Also, it will be extremely
>> important if you could provide some materials with design rationale of the
>> algorithms and parameters presented in the I-D.
>>
>> Of course, full cryptanalysis from a scratch is impossible to be made as
>> a part of review, so all known results/attacks/notes on design
>> rationale/results of evaluation of curve parameters will be very important
>> for making the review(s) as objective as possible.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Stanislav Smyshlyaev, Ph.D.
>> Head of Information Security Department,
>> CryptoPro LLC
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-11-28 18:47 GMT+03:00 Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com>:
>>
>>> Dear Stanislav,
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for performing the review. Look forward to it!
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Ron
>>>
>>> _____________________________________
>>>
>>> Ronald Tse
>>> Ribose Inc.
>>>
>>> On Nov 28, 2017, at 11:21 PM, Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <smyshsv@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Alexey,
>>>
>>> I'll be happy to do this.
>>>
>>> Will it be OK, if I provide a review by the 20th of December?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Stanislav
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-11-28 17:02 GMT+03:00 Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>:
>>>
>>>> Dear Crypto Panel,
>>>>
>>>> SAAG’s SECDISPATCH chairs have requested review of
>>>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ribose-openpgp-oscca/>
>>>> before the document fate will be decided (it is likely to end up in the
>>>> CURDLE WG).
>>>>
>>>> Can we have some volunteer(s) please?
>>>>
>>>> The draft Abstract is:
>>>>
>>>>    This document enables OpenPGP (RFC4880) usage in an compliant manner
>>>>    with OSCCA (Office of State Commercial Cipher Administration)
>>>>    regulations for use within China.
>>>>
>>>>    Specifically, it extends OpenPGP to support the usage of SM2, SM3 and
>>>>    SM4 algorithms, and provides the OSCCA-compliant OpenPGP profile
>>>>    "OSCCA-SM234".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> Alexey
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Crypto-panel mailing list
>>>> Crypto-panel@irtf.org
>>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/crypto-panel
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>