[secdir] draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-kem-18 ietf last call Secdir review

[Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Document: draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-kem
Title: Composite ML-KEM for use in X.509 Public Key Infrastructure
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review result: Has Nits

The document is well written, but has many typos.

Minor Issues:
- Section 3.1.1 allows a modified deterministic
Composite-ML-KEM<OID>.KeyGen(seed) interface where one component may be
generated from the seed and the other from random, or the input seed may be
cryptographically expanded to produce seeds for both components. It then says
the security analysis of such a modified process is outside the document’s
scope. Given the strict requirement that both component keys be freshly
generated and not reused, this seems like an important security-sensitive
extension. It would be nice to add minimum guidance that seed expansion, if
used, must provide domain separation between component algorithms and composite
algorithm identifiers, and must use an approved KDF or DRBG suitable for
generating independent component seeds.

- The draft clearly states that component keys must be freshly generated and
must not be reused in standalone or other composite contexts. However, Section
9.3 says designers are aware that some implementers may be forced to break this
rule. That is useful realism, but it may read as permission.

NITS:
  s/pramater sets X25519 and X448/parameter sets X25519 and X448/

  Need a space before "this": “mechanism.This generally means”

  s/defined in in this specification/defined in this specification/

  s/than an error occured/that an error occurred/?

  s/cryptohraphically expanded/cryptographically expanded/

  s/SHOULD NOT by applied/SHOULD NOT be applied/?

  s/at least is principle/at least in principle/?

  s/traditional compenent/traditional component/

  What do you mean by saying "Generifying this construction"?

  In Section 10.1.1, “Third” appears twice in the sequence of reasons. The
  second one should probably be “Fourth.

  s/ammendments/amendments/

  In Appendix E.1, “indpendently is this is expected” appears to have multiple
  typos.

Best Regards,
Linda Dunbar