On Wed, Oct 29, 2025, 9:03 AM Nico Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 03:54:11PM +0000, Kampanakis, Panos wrote: > > Good idea. Option (f) could be an erratum that calls out EdDSA and > > ML-DSA as examples of "built-in digest signatures" in X.509 that fall > > under the non MD-5/SHA-1 hash bullet of RFC 5929. > > Is that truly an erratum? I think an update is in order. (Who shall do > that work?) > I volunteer. I think once we finish this thread it's a pretty straightforward though tedious exercise in copypasta to write what we wrote. >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
