NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
nsa.2026.action.cr.yp.to
NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
1–10 of 100 posts
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#2I'm not sure this is as clear-cut as the article implies, but there is certainly a whiff of people behaving badly.
The latest post to the list, as of this post, is supporting the anti-ecdhe side, with the reasoning being that there is no code written for ecdhe, which is obviously stretching the truth beyond reasonable doubt.
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#3Clicking around I don't see any "nsa.gov" email addresses for the positions this site says are from the NSA. Have I just missed some things that are clearly from the NSA? If not, how would one know that these various academic and personal email addresses have some kind of NSA tie?
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#4“Surveillance agency NSA and its partner GCHQ are trying to have standards-development organizations endorse weakening ECC+PQ down to just PQ.”[0]
That’s pretty weak just stripping down the hybrid approach.
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#5Clicking around I don't see any "nsa.gov" email addresses for the positions this site says are from the NSA. Have I just missed some things that are clearly from the NSA? If not, how would one know that these various academic and personal email addresses have some kind of NSA tie?
I don’t think the spy agency would use nsa.gov address to manipulate the technology trajectory.
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#6Clicking around I don't see any "nsa.gov" email addresses for the positions this site says are from the NSA. Have I just missed some things that are clearly from the NSA? If not, how would one know that these various academic and personal email addresses have some kind of NSA tie?
I don’t think the spy agency would use nsa.gov address to manipulate the technology trajectory.
Of course, but is there any actual evidence that these accounts are NSA related? Or is it an assumption because they are supporting the proposal (which would be very circular logic)
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#7What exactly is the problem with the IETF publishing a standard that's theoretically weaker than another standard? They're not forcing anyone to use it, right?
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#8Clicking around I don't see any "nsa.gov" email addresses for the positions this site says are from the NSA. Have I just missed some things that are clearly from the NSA? If not, how would one know that these various academic and personal email addresses have some kind of NSA tie?
The inexplicable behavior is indistinguishable from behavior that could be explained by a conspiracy.
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#9Forming a (imo particularly rancid conspiracy brained) social media rage campaign to get a bunch of new people to inject themselves into cryptography space is... a move.
Maybe giving this thread more visibility here than it wants but ...
https://bsky.app/profile/filippo.abyssdomain.expert/post/3mp...
(Personally it seems so so unacceptable to me to accuse so many good hardworking people of such bitter conspiracy.)
Re: NSA tries to weaken mlkem standardisation?
#10This is not an unbiased article about the situation unfolding on the TLS Working Group mailing list; this is a call to action to join one specific side of the argument that has been ongoing for over a year now. It's an appeal to authority, an attempt to garner support for one side of the debate simply because DJB says so, as part of his effort to flood the zone with messages in opposition.
This tactic is explicitly called out in RFC 7282, and named as a "degenerate", "pathological", and "dysfunctional" state for the working group to be in. Shame on DJB for attempting to drive the working group into terminal dysfunction.