Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dilithium: Update to NIST Draft Standard #511

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Sep 28, 2023
Merged

Conversation

mkannwischer
Copy link
Contributor

Manually checked properties

  • Generated Github workflow (run .github/workflows/generate_workflows.py) (new schemes)
  • No stringification macros
  • Output-parameter pointers in functions are on the left
  • Negative return values on failure of API functions (within restrictions of FO transform).
  • variable declarations at the beginning (except in for (size_t i=...)
  • Optional:
    • All integer types are of fixed size, using stdint.h types (including uint8_t instead of unsigned char)
    • Integers used for indexing are of size size_t

@thomwiggers
Copy link
Member

test_functest.py seems to work on M2

@thomwiggers
Copy link
Member

I've merged #500. This means that there are a gajillion files in conflict but should also mean that we approach green CI a bit sooner.

@mkannwischer
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've merged #500. This means that there are a gajillion files in conflict but should also mean that we approach green CI a bit sooner.

I've rebased this on top of master. So I think it's ready for review now.
Can you test the nistkat on Apple silicon as well, please? Now it should be working fine.

@mkannwischer mkannwischer marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2023 05:54
@thomwiggers
Copy link
Member

Seems to work. Just checking, like the Kyber PR, this follows the reference code repository's standard branch, right? There are some differences I believe...

@thomwiggers thomwiggers self-requested a review September 25, 2023 10:19
thomwiggers
thomwiggers previously approved these changes Sep 25, 2023
Copy link
Member

@thomwiggers thomwiggers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Scrolling through this looks convincing.

@mkannwischer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Seems to work. Just checking, like the Kyber PR, this follows the reference code repository's standard branch, right? There are some differences I believe...

Yes, indeed. This version is compatible with the https://github.com/pq-crystals/dilithium/tree/standard (commit pq-crystals/dilithium@918af1a).

@thomwiggers thomwiggers merged commit d5759e6 into master Sep 28, 2023
@thomwiggers thomwiggers deleted the nistdraftdilithium branch September 28, 2023 10:48
tniessen added a commit to tniessen/node-pqclean that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2023
Most notably, this removes the Haraka and robust variants of SPHINCS+ as
well as the AES variants of Dilithium.

Refs: PQClean/PQClean#505
Refs: PQClean/PQClean#511
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants