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

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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>