Timeline for Why did NIST Post Quantum Standardization have 2 schemes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29 at 5:36 | vote | accept | keithRozario | ||
| Apr 24 at 17:29 | answer | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | timeline score: 4 | |
| Apr 24 at 10:37 | comment | added | kelalaka | RSA and ECDH are prone to Shor's shortest-period finding algorithms. So we need new mechanisms to securely key exchange/establish/encapsulate. | |
| Apr 24 at 10:35 | comment | added | kelalaka | I think you are asking why NIST did not call for candidates for Encryption and Hash Algorithms. Well, AES-256 is already Post Quantum secure and may even AES-128. Actually, any classically secure block cipher with 256 bits of key is secure. This table lists the requirements so you can see why they are secure | |
| Apr 24 at 9:17 | comment | added | Maeher | "Could you take something like [...] SPHINCS+ and turn them into KEMs?" That would be a major breakthrough that would need to circumvent established impossibility results. | |
| S Apr 24 at 8:33 | review | First questions | |||
| Apr 25 at 9:11 | |||||
| S Apr 24 at 8:33 | history | asked | keithRozario | CC BY-SA 4.0 |