Re: [lamps] Adoption call for draft-housley-lamps-cms-sha3-hash

Panos:

Mike Ounsworth needs these OIDs to be available, and the easiest solution was to just publish the previously abandoned I-D.

Russ

> On Oct 27, 2023, at 11:00 PM, Kampanakis, Panos <kpanos=40amazon.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Russ, 
>  
> I was under the impression that SHAKEs for CMS and X.509 would suffice for introducing the Keccak family to these standards. SHAKEs have the same security and better performance. I thought that was the reason draft-turner-lamps-adding-sha3-to-pkix never made it.
>  
> Is there a reason why someone would use SHA-3 in CMS instead of SHAKE128 or SHAKE256 (RFC8702)?
>  
>  
>  
> From: Spasm <spasm-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:spasm-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2023 11:39 AM
> To: SPASM <spasm@ietf.org <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [lamps] Adoption call for draft-housley-lamps-cms-sha3-hash
>  
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
>  
> Hello,
>  
> Russ has asked for an adoption call for this short document that explains how to
> use SHA-3 with CMS.  Since people may be traveling to IETF 118, we’ll do a three
> week adoption call.
>  
>  
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-housley-lamps-cms-sha3-hash-00
>  
> Abstract
>  
>    This document describes the conventions for using the four one-way
>    hash functions in the SHA3 family with the Cryptographic Message
>    Syntax (CMS).
>  
> Please indicate whether you support adoption, and optionally indicate why, on
> the list by 17 November 2023.
>  
> For the chairs,
>  
> -Tim
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Spasm mailing list
> Spasm@ietf.org <mailto:Spasm@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm