2022.08.07 19:49:04 (1556336638636085248) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Nadim Kobeissi (@nadim@symbolic.software) (@kaepora)" = "Nadim Kobeissi (@kaepora)" (1556289215045976064):
"At the risk of belaboring the obvious: An attacker won't have to say 'Oops, researcher X is working in public and has just found an attack; can we suppress this somehow?' if the attacker had the common sense to hire X years earlier, meaning that X isn't working in public." 1/2
2022.08.07 19:51:00 (1556337124734951424) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Quote continued: "People arguing that there can't be sabotage because submission teams can't be bribed are completely missing the point. ... It's not hard to imagine that [NSA] has been pushing NISTPQC to select algorithms that NSA secretly knows how to break." 2/2
2022.08.05 20:43:34 (1555625577989541888) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
New blog post "NSA, NIST, and post-quantum cryptography: Announcing my second lawsuit against the U.S. government." https://blog.cr.yp.to/20220805-nsa.html Case filed in federal court today by @LoevyAndLoevy. #nsa #nist #des #dsa #dualec #sigintenablingproject #nistpqc #foia
2022.08.07 16:40:37 (1556289215045976064) from "Nadim Kobeissi (@nadim@symbolic.software) (@kaepora)" = "Nadim Kobeissi (@kaepora)":
Dan, could you explicitly clarify whether or not you meant to insinuate that the NSA attempted to bribe applicants to NIST PQC? To me, you rather seem to say that NSA may have hired too many of the best minds to do research privately within NSA and not in a public setting, (1/2)