On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 2:52 AM Watson Ladd <[email protected]> wrote:
> Since singing is designed to be offline, and verification doesn't > actually matter, and size does, SQISign is the obvious choice. We know > verification doesn't matter given people regularly turn it off rather > than fail closed when verification is failing. > Yesterday a new attack against SQIsign was published [1], and it was acknowledged by the SQIsign designers [2]. It doesn't break SQIsign completely, but it looks like they'll have to change parameters. It'll take some time to figure out by how much. This attack is not a surprise: SQIsign and the other appealing signature schemes in the on-ramp competition just need more time for proper evaluation. Best, Bas [1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2026/1486 [2] https://groups.google.com/a/list.nist.gov/g/pqc-forum/c/TVIAOVbYP1w/m/K9_etUqkBwAJ
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
