Hi Uri, NIST does not have an active plan to standardize them at this moment.
The options with KMACs are for the users who would like to use NIST-approved options. The options with KangarooTwelves and TurboSHAKEs are not NIST-approved. They have better performance than the options with KMACs and they are also more cost efficient for masked implementations (to protect against side channel attacks). Regards, Quynh. On Mon, Jul 6, 2026 at 3:44 PM Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL < [email protected]> wrote: > Quynh, > > Could we read from the fact that you co-authored this draft, that NIST may > consider standardizing KangarooTwelve and TurboSHAKE? > Or is it your personal participation only? > > TNX > -- > V/R, > Uri > > *There are two ways to design a system. One is to make it so simple there > are obviously no deficiencies.* > *The other is to make it so complex there are no obvious deficiencies.* > * > C. A. R. Hoare* > > *From: *Dang, Quynh H. (Fed) <[email protected]> > *Date: *Monday, July 6, 2026 at 13:34 > *To: *Michael Jones <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]> > *Cc: *cose <[email protected]> > *Subject: *[EXT] [COSE] KangarooTwelve, TurboSHAKE and KMAC for COSE. > > This Message Is From an External Sender > This message came from outside the Laboratory. > > > Hi Mike and Ivaylo, > > > > Carsten and I would like to ask you for 10 minutes to present the draft > below at the upcoming IETF 126. > > > > *https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bormann-cose-turbo-kanga-kmac/* > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bormann-cose-turbo-kanga-kmac/> > > > > Thank you and Regards, > > Quynh. > _______________________________________________ > 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]
