On Jul 27, 2026, at 05:51, Shumon Huque <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> A new validator implementation could unilaterally impose that rule, sure.
And it might. That would require that the validator had such a knob in its
config, and would be implementation-specific.
> But ideally, there should be some general rule for algorithm downgrade
> resistance that is signaled in the protocol, rather than special casing a
> rule only for a specific algorithm.
THERE BE DRAGONS!
It is probably fine to have a signal that says "do not downgrade from {set of
PQ algorithms} to {set of classical algorithms}, but a signal that says 'do not
downgrade from {PQ alg 1} to {PQ alg 2} is inherently dangerous because if alg
1 becomes weakened by a later attack, you have just created a signal that
basically forces a downgrade.
Creating such a signal introduces fragility into DNSSEC where all authoritative
zone operators need to understand and keep up with non-definitive news about
which algorithms have "equivalent strength" and which have "higher strength"
than others.
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
