Hi Mike, Absolutely, I’d be happy to review the draft!
Brendan On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 at 16:06, Michael Prorock <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Brendan, > Definite confirmation to rev the draft and get it in line with the NIST > draft as soon as that is out. > > Can I count on your eyes on the draft once I get an updated version out? > > Mike Prorock > > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 4:59 PM Brendan Moran < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I want to voice my support for draft-ietf-cose-falcon. >> >> To give some context, constrained devices currently are limited to >> ECDSA, EDDSA, or HSS-LMS. For those deploying devices with PQC >> support, there is only one option: HSS-LMS. This presents a big >> problem: HSS-LMS requires stateful private keys that have race >> conditions in backup scenarios. In other words, HSS-LMS is risky but >> it's the best option we have. >> >> I think Falcon would be a much better option for constrained device >> code signing. To be clear, what we're discussing here is constrained >> devices verifying signatures, with the signers potentially air-gapped, >> so side channels & floating point are a non-issue. >> >> The signature size is smaller than HSS-LMS with an equivalent number >> of bits of security and there's no state on the private key. >> >> This makes Falcon ideal for delivering firmware updates and secure >> boot of constrained devices, where the cost of delivering a SPHINCS+ >> signature, for example, would be prohibitive. >> >> Best Regards, >> Brendan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> COSE mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
