[lamps] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17.txt

["Samuel Lee (ENS/Crypto)" <[e-mail]>]

Awesome, thanks Mike - excited for Composite specs to be published!
________________________________
From: Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]>
Sent: 09 April 2026 13:57
To: Samuel Lee (ENS/Crypto) <[e-mail]>; LAMPS WG <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] [lamps] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17.txt

Adding the public mailing list.

Hi Samuel,

I did not see the comment on the closed issue. Thanks for pointing me to it. Yup. I was editing too quickly and changed the wrong section. Thanks.

I'll bundle this up with the latest suggestions from Mike Bishop and publish a new version shortly. Thanks!

On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 at 15:30, Samuel Lee (ENS/Crypto) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hey Mike,

I don't want to hold up composite-signature publication or make your life hard, but wanted to highlight the nitpick Timing-invariant Signature Failure Check and Issues With SHAKE256/64 · Issue #340 · lamps-wg/draft-composite-sigs<https://github.com/lamps-wg/draft-composite-sigs/issues/340> is still unaddressed.

Is it worth me putting a quick note on the LAMPS mailing list to raise this point and ensure that LAMPS folks have eyes on it?
I can also post an errata down the line, I do not consider the SHOULD text to be blocking for implementation; just would prefer not to have to argue about it later if we're not following the SHOULD.

Apologies for not catching this earlier - we're actually in the weeds of implementation on our side (initial composite-ml-kem is published on SymCrypt already! https://github.com/microsoft/SymCrypt/blob/2864ff0da96642049a66808d86a8bad2736b85e8/inc/symcrypt.h#L10178) which is why we started thinking about these details a bit more closely.

Best,
Sam
________________________________
From: Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: 09 April 2026 08:26
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [lamps] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17.txt

Sorry, I had missed Ketan's COMMENTs:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/9WiKvYZFmxFui2izAfsMCmQo8bw/

This version addresses those.


On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 at 10:24, <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17.txt is now available. It
is a work item of the Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (LAMPS)
WG of the IETF.

   Title:   Composite Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Algorithm (ML-DSA) for use in X.509 Public Key Infrastructure
   Authors: Mike Ounsworth
            John Gray
            Massimiliano Pala
            Jan Klaussner
            Scott Fluhrer
   Name:    draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17.txt
   Pages:   234
   Dates:   2026-04-09

Abstract:

   This document defines combinations of US NIST Module-Lattice-Based
   Digital Signature Algorithm (ML-DSA) in hybrid with traditional
   algorithms RSASSA-PKCS1-v1.5, RSASSA-PSS, ECDSA, Ed25519, and Ed448.
   These combinations are tailored to meet regulatory guidelines in
   certain regions.  Composite ML-DSA is applicable in applications that
   use X.509 or PKIX data structures that accept ML-DSA, but where the
   operator wants extra protection against breaks or catastrophic bugs
   in ML-DSA, and where existential unforgeability (EUF-CMA) level
   security is acceptable.

The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs/

There is also an HTML version available at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17.html

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-17

Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts


_______________________________________________
Spasm mailing list -- [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>