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

[Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]>]

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]> 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]>
> *Sent:* 09 April 2026 08:26
> *To:* [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* [e-mail] <[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]> 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]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
>