[TLS] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-08 (Ends 20 26-07-08)

"Scott Fluhrer \(sfluhrer\)" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.tls
Message-ID <PH3PPFA3FE8A23F0A9D374B266D158EC4FBC1FF2@PH3PPFA3FE8A23F.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
+1

I've said this before; I'll say it again - if you don't believe that pure ML-KEM gives sufficient security, then (by the same logic) you have to believe that hybrid doesn't give sufficient postquantum security.

________________________________
From: Paul Wouters <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2026 11:16 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [TLS] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-08 (Ends 2026-07-08)

That is to say, I think selectively applying this argument to
draft-ietf-tls-mlkem but not draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-mlkem is invalid.

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.