I'd be happy for the checks to be removed. On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 5:03 AM Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2026, at 12:47, David Benjamin wrote: > >> 2. (Decapsulation key type check) If dk is not a byte array of length > 768𝑘+96 for the value of > >> 𝑘 specified by the relevant parameter set, then input checking has > failed. > > > > This is the *length of the private key*. That is (hehe) checking what > > you generated. It is *not* what you received from the other side. > > I see, thanks for the explanation. I sort of assumed that FIPS 203 > wouldn't be THAT silly. Bad assumption on my part. > > Given that any checking that exists is already implied by an invocation of > Encaps/Decaps, would it be acceptable to simply remove the explicit pointer > to the checks? > > I've suggested that on the PR: > https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-mlkem/pull/25/changes#r3478889869 >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
