Hi Behcet Sarikaya, thank you for the review. I have made some fixes to address these comments here: https://github.com/lamps-wg/draft-composite-kem/commit/c70e297a2c2458415388e00308e9cf0b8fa59753 but I will hold pushing to datatracker because I have a few clarifying questions back to you below.
Section 1 RSA vs RSA-OAEP is not explained at all [MikeO]: This spec references a pile of cryptographic algorithms, including ML-KEM, RSA-OAEP, ECDH, X25519, X448, and SHA3. We don't really "explain" any of them, but references to their specifications are included in Appendix B. The opining sentence of Section 1 does at least expand the acronym "OAEP" and mention that this is a mode of RSA: "traditional cryptographic key establishment algorithms in common use -- namely the Rivest–Shamir–Adleman cryptosystem in the Optimal Asymmetric Encryption Padding mode (RSA-OAEP), and elliptic curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH) -- will become vulnerable to quantum attacks." [MikeO]: If that's not sufficient, then maybe you could explain further what level of explanation you feel is missing? expand at first use: PQC post quantum cryptography (PQC) [MikeO]: Good catch. in in this specification; this is discussed further PKIX-related Public Key Infrastructure X.509 [MikeO]: I don't understand these comments. Can you explain further what change you are looking for here? Post-Quantum / Traditional (PQ/T) Hybrids combined idea seems to be central to this document this gives stronger algorithms since an attacker would need to break all of them simultaneously to compromise the protected data [MikeO]: I added a forward link to the Security Considerations that discuss the properties of PQ/T hybrids in more detail. 1.1 pramater sets [MikeO]: Good catch. 2.2 KEM Encaps(pk) -> (ss, ct) "." missing? [MikeO]: Fixed. Added complete test vectors in Version -07 of this document contributing almost 60 pages [MikeO]: This is true, are you asking for some kind of change here? 9. Security Considerations dual algorithm security [MikeO]: I don't understand these comments. Can you explain further what change you are looking for here? In Section 10 there is 10. Operational Considerations calling for an Ops area review? [MikeO]: These Operational Considerations are really quite cryptography-specific, so I'm not sure that an OPS Dir review would add much, but of course I would welcome more eyes. On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 at 11:43, Behcet Sarikaya via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Document: draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-kem > Title: Composite ML-KEM for use in X.509 Public Key Infrastructure > Reviewer: Behcet Sarikaya > Review result: Almost Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>. > > Document: draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-kem-18 > Reviewer: Behcet Sarikaya > Review Date: 2026-07-27 > IETF LC End Date: 2026-07-27 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: > This document defines combinations > of US NIST Module-Lattice-based Key Encapsulation Mechanism i.e. ML-KEM in > hybrid with > traditional algorithms RSA-OAEP, ECDH, X25519, and X448 > Major issues: > None > Minor issues: > > Nits/editorial comments: > > Section 1 > RSA vs RSA-OAEP is not explained at all > > expand at first use: PQC post quantum cryptography (PQC) > > in in this > specification; this is discussed further > > PKIX-related Public Key Infrastructure X.509 > > > Post-Quantum / Traditional (PQ/T) Hybrids > combined > idea seems to be central to this document > this gives stronger algorithms since > an attacker would need to break all of them > simultaneously to compromise the protected data > > 1.1 > pramater sets > > 2.2 > > KEM Encaps(pk) -> (ss, ct) "." missing? > > Added complete test vectors in Version -07 of this document > contributing almost 60 pages > > > 9. Security Considerations > dual algorithm security > > In Section 10 there is > 10. Operational Considerations > > > calling for an Ops area review? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spasm mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
