mirror of
https://github.com/open-quantum-safe/liboqs.git
synced 2025-12-13 00:03:06 -05:00
* Updated sig templates to add support for arch specific upstreams. Currently behaves as expected, but still need to test (and integrate) dilithium * Fixed a couple of build errors, and started work on dilithium integration from pqclean. Currently failing kat tests * Updated templating for both sig and kem to make them look a little better * Renamed dilithium folders so they are consistent across pqclean and pqcrystals so that copy_from_upstream script will function correctly * Added arm optimized version of dilithium[2|3|5] * Updating other signature schemes CMakeLists.txt to be the output of the updated templates * Arm optimized implementation of dilithium is added, with randomized signing patched into it. copy_from_upstream script is working properly. Still need to update the update_docs scripts before ready to merge * Finished updating docs scripts and yml files. Builds pass, so should be ready for a merge * Fixed template issue with multiple compile flags * Updated doc generation scripts so that all '_' in scheme names are replaced with '\_'
6.2 KiB
6.2 KiB
SABER
- Algorithm type: Key encapsulation mechanism.
- Main cryptographic assumption: Module learning with rounding.
- Principal submitters: Jan-Pieter D'Anvers, Angshuman Karmakar, Sujoy Sinha Roy, Frederik Vercauteren.
- Authors' website: https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/cosic/pqcrypto/saber/
- Specification version: NIST Round 3 submission.
- Primary Source:
- Source:
4c9e5a3aa7with copy_from_upstream patches - Implementation license (SPDX-Identifier): Public domain , which takes it from:
- https://github.com/jschanck/package-pqclean/tree/1ae84c3c/saber, which takes it from:
509cc5ec3a
- Source:
Parameter set summary
| Parameter set | Security model | Claimed NIST Level | Public key size (bytes) | Secret key size (bytes) | Ciphertext size (bytes) | Shared secret size (bytes) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LightSaber-KEM | IND-CCA2 | 1 | 672 | 1568 | 736 | 32 |
| Saber-KEM | IND-CCA2 | 3 | 992 | 2304 | 1088 | 32 |
| FireSaber-KEM | IND-CCA2 | 5 | 1312 | 3040 | 1472 | 32 |
LightSaber-KEM implementation characteristics
| Implementation source | Identifier in upstream | Supported architecture(s) | Supported operating system(s) | CPU extension(s) used | No branching-on-secrets claimed? | No branching-on-secrets checked by valgrind? | Large stack usage?‡ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Source | clean | All | All | None | True | True | False |
| Primary Source | avx2 | x86_64 | Linux,Darwin | AVX2 | False | True | False |
| Primary Source | aarch64 | ARM64_V8 | Linux,Darwin | None | False | False | False |
Are implementations chosen based on runtime CPU feature detection? Yes.
‡For an explanation of what this denotes, consult the Explanation of Terms section at the end of this file.
Saber-KEM implementation characteristics
| Implementation source | Identifier in upstream | Supported architecture(s) | Supported operating system(s) | CPU extension(s) used | No branching-on-secrets claimed? | No branching-on-secrets checked by valgrind? | Large stack usage? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Source | clean | All | All | None | True | True | False |
| Primary Source | avx2 | x86_64 | Linux,Darwin | AVX2 | False | True | False |
| Primary Source | aarch64 | ARM64_V8 | Linux,Darwin | None | False | False | False |
Are implementations chosen based on runtime CPU feature detection? Yes.
FireSaber-KEM implementation characteristics
| Implementation source | Identifier in upstream | Supported architecture(s) | Supported operating system(s) | CPU extension(s) used | No branching-on-secrets claimed? | No branching-on-secrets checked by valgrind? | Large stack usage? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Source | clean | All | All | None | True | True | False |
| Primary Source | avx2 | x86_64 | Linux,Darwin | AVX2 | False | True | False |
| Primary Source | aarch64 | ARM64_V8 | Linux,Darwin | None | False | False | False |
Are implementations chosen based on runtime CPU feature detection? Yes.
Explanation of Terms
- Large Stack Usage: Implementations identified as having such may cause failures when running in threads or in constrained environments.