[lamps] Re: Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-cms-composite-sigs-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[[e-mail]]

Hi Daniel, all, 

Thank you for the follow-up.

I reviewed both the PR and the clarifications below. Look good to me. Will update my ballot once the new version is published. Thanks.

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Daniel Van Geest <[e-mail]>
> Envoyé : mercredi 13 mai 2026 19:52
> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[e-mail]>;
> The IESG <[e-mail]>
> Cc : [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Objet : Re: Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-cms-
> composite-sigs-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> 
> Hi Mohamed, thank you for your review. Comments inline, and here
> is the PR that addresses some of your
> comments: https://github.com/lamps-wg/cms-composite-sigs/pull/14
> On 4/26/2026 3:40 PM, Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker wrote:
> > Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-lamps-cms-composite-sigs-04: Discuss
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply
> to all
> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
> cut
> > this introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to
> >
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> www.
> > ietf.org%2Fabout%2Fgroups%2Fiesg%2Fstatements%2Fhandling-ballot-
> positi
> >
> ons%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Ca117577efa9
> c4ac
> >
> 5f4f708deb1186240%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639
> 1429
> >
> 15466852521%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOi
> IwLj
> >
> AuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%
> 7C%7
> >
> C&sdata=pckvDWKbHaOiZ7AI32iilQyE156MdY2eoad%2BAA6ue04%3D&reserved=
> 0
> > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT
> positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found
> here:
> >
> https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> data
> > tracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-lamps-cms-composite-
> sigs%2F&data=0
> >
> 5%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Ca117577efa9c4ac5f4f708de
> b118
> >
> 6240%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C6391429154668644
> 92%7
> >
> CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCI
> sIlA
> >
> iOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%
> 2ByY
> > RnREZ9mNVMewUatqX0Vard6mRgNbSUMimzYAhB3I%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > DISCUSS:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> >
> > Hi Mike, John, Jan, and Daniel,
> >
> > Thank you for the effort put into this well-written
> specification.
> >
> > Thanks to Niclas Comstedt for the OPSDIR review.
> >
> > I trust the various modules and examples were validated.
> >
> > Please find some easy-to-fix DISCUSS points:
> >
> > # ASN.1.
> >
> > CURRENT:
> >     CMS values are generated using ASN.1 [X680], using the Basic
> Encoding
> >     Rules (BER) and the Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER)
> [X690].
> >
> >     ..
> >
> >     4.  ASN.1 Module
> >
> > Please move both [X680] and [X690] to be listed as normative as
> these are need for the module.
> Fixed
> > # Terminology
> >
> >     This document is consistent with the terminology defined in
> >     [RFC9794].
> >
> > This makes 9794 as normative to understand the terminology.
> >
> > Alternatively, you may follow the approach in draft-ietf-lamps-
> pq-composite-sigs#Section 1.1.
> This draft actually uses little-to-no terminology from RFC 9794.
> The little it used was just "traditional" which, while relevant to
> implementers of Composite ML-DSA, isn't relevant to users of
> Composite ML-DSA in CMS.  Text using "traditional" has been
> tweaked and the reference to RFC 9794 has been removed.
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> >
> > # Please expand ML-DSA to Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature
> > Algorithm
> > (ML-DSA) in the title and abstract
> Done
> > # Cite references
> >
> > CURRENT:
> >     [FIPS204] with traditional algorithms RSASSA-PKCS1-v1.5,
> RSASSA-PSS,
> >     ECDSA, Ed25519, and Ed448.
> >
> > Can we have reference for each of these algos?
> Done
> > # Cite as a reference
> >
> > OLD: At the time RFC 5652 was published,
> >
> > NEW: At the time [RFC5652] was published,
> Done
> > # Pre-hash mode: Remid Rationale
> >
> > CURRENT:
> >    Composite ML-DSA operates only in a "pre-hash" mode.
> >
> > May add a pointer to rfc9882#3.1 or to rfc9881#section-8.3 to
> remind
> > the rationale?
> Unlike ML-DSA, which offers both pre-hash and pure modes,
> Composite ML-DSA offers only pre-hash modes, so a similar
> rationale to RFC 8992 or RFC 8991 shouldn't be necessary.  We have
> nothing to rationalize, in CMS we couldn't have done it any other
> way.  The text is tweaked to make it clearer that Composite ML-DSA
> only provides a pre-hash mode.
> > # Explain when one may deviate from list for the following
> SHOULD
> >
> > CURRENT:
> >     The SignedData digestAlgorithms field includes the
> identifiers of the
> >     message digest algorithms used by one or more signer.  When
> signing
> >     with a Composite ML-DSA algorithm, this list of identifiers
> SHOULD
> >     include the corresponding digest algorithm from Table 1.
> Text has been added, not to explain when one may deviate but to
> explain what might happen if one deviates.
> > # Operational Considerations
> >
> > 9882#section 5 includes a discussion about operational
> considerations.
> > I think these are applicable here as well.
> >
> > As this document "borrows heavily from" RFC9882 per the ACK
> Section
> > ;-), I suggest to also barrow the ops part as well.
> Unlike ML-DSA, Composite ML-DSA only operates in pre-hash mode.
> Thus the message being transmitted to an HSM will always be small,
> whether it's the digest being transmitted to an HSM which fully
> implements Composite ML-DSA or an internal M' being transmitted to
> an HSM implementing the ML-DSA component of Composite ML-DSA (and
> this detail would only be relevant to an implementer of draft-
> ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs, not of this draft).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Med
> >
> >
> >

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.