Closed wussler closed 2 months ago
@TJ-91 should be fixed
Ufff, I forgot in how many places we referenced this...
I think in most of the places it would be better to write "SHA3-256" instead of just "SHA-3", what do you think?
Makes sense, since we use explicitly only this algo
I also rewrote the security consideration, cutting out the proof for the omission of the PKs and adapting the references
Adapt the KDF proposal to the discussion held at IETF 119