Hi, I raised https://github.com/cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus/pull/13 (could use a careful review, this is a vibeslop PR)
If anyone has other implementations they want me to add cross tests for, please leave a comment on the PR. Regards, OS On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 1:09 PM Neil Madden <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with Filip. Ideally there would be test vectors for every > algorithm registered, although that would be quite large given the size of > the signatures involved. > > Regarding the size, the smallest parameter set produces JOSE signatures of > over 10KB in size, after base64url-encoding. So they are probably only > going to have niche usage in the JOSE ecosystem, but it’s harmless to > register them. Also, SLH-DSA public keys are quite small so there may be > value in using them in JWKs independently, to bootstrap another protocol. > > — Neil > > On 3 Apr 2026, at 13:56, Filip Skokan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Furthermore, if you intend to keep JOSE in then please update the JOSE > examples appendix section with actual working vectors. The existing > "example" leaves a lot to be desired. > > S pozdravem, > *Filip Skokan* > > > On Fri, 3 Apr 2026 at 14:40, Filip Skokan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Since this draft registers JOSE algorithms and defines JWK >> representations it would be prudent to send its WGLC notice there as well. >> cc @JOSE WG <[email protected]> >> >> I appreciate the algorithm set is kept at a minimum. But I still don't >> see these as general purpose algorithms that we necessarily "*need"* to >> have in JOSE (unlike ML-DSA/FN-DSA). I'll bite tho and say that it doesn't >> hurt to have them registered as backup given the novelty and some small >> uncertainty surrounding the other PQC algs in general. >> >> That being said I would welcome it if the draft did mention something >> along those lines, these algorithms are either targeting a niche purpose or >> serve as backup, the former is more likely. General purpose JOSE libraries >> shouldn't bother implementing these. I for one certainly won't, being >> mindful of the library footprint. Also none of the Web Cryptography API >> implementers currently plan to support them despite being included in the >> API's Modern Algorithms <https://wicg.github.io/webcrypto-modern-algos/> >> extension. >> >> Speaking of which, the Web Cryptography extension will register all >> remaining SLH-DSA parameter sets in JOSE IANA for JWK representation >> purposes only (Algorithm Usage Location(s): "JWK"). It currently lists the >> ones from this draft too but that's merely because at some point it was >> uncertain whether this is going to move forward or not. I will update the >> extension proposal accordingly depending on what gets published in this >> draft. >> >> S pozdravem, >> *Filip Skokan* >> >> >> On Tue, 24 Mar 2026 at 18:58, Ivaylo Petrov <ivaylopetrov= >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear COSE WG members, >>> >>> As discussed during IETF 125, this message starts a WG Last Call (WGLC) >>> for: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus/ >>> >>> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceeding with >>> the >>> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping >>> [email protected] >>> in copy. Please provide rationale for support and explanations or >>> suggestions >>> for objections. >>> >>> This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-04-14 >>> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> -- Mike and >>> Ivo >>> >>> COSE >>> co-chairs >>> >>> >>> Please note: >>> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual >>> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1]. >>> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the >>> provisions >>> of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. >>> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can >>> be >>> found at [3]. >>> >>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ >>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ >>> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> COSE mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> >> _______________________________________________ > jose 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]
