a) I propose that a sentence is added in 10.3 to let readers (= engineers) know WHY the document teaches them about IND-CCA2. I think in the current form it’s a bit unclear. Does the paragraph tell me that only Kyber, McEliece and Saber are IND-CCA2 secure? If no, does it tell me any IND-CCA2-secure algorithm is ok? Are others not ok? How does the paragraph enable me to decide anything and when might a decision arise (if at all)?
(I’m not really asking, I’m saying that these questions might arise and a bit more explanation might clarify things. I’m not suggesting a sentence either, since I am not exactly sure what the aim of this paragraph is.) (Addressed)
b) In 10.3 switch the explanation around: Explain IND-CCA2 first, then name the algorithms and then (if the idea in a) is acted upon) provide the additional context. (Addressed)
c) Rename 10.3 “Security notion”. It’s only one property, but the title is “.. propertieS”. That might be confusing, like something’s missing. (Addressed)
d) Rename 11.2 to match 10.3 (Addressed)
e) Like for 10.3, switch the explanation to the front + add a sentence for context at the end in 11.2 (Addressed)
a) I propose that a sentence is added in 10.3 to let readers (= engineers) know WHY the document teaches them about IND-CCA2. I think in the current form it’s a bit unclear. Does the paragraph tell me that only Kyber, McEliece and Saber are IND-CCA2 secure? If no, does it tell me any IND-CCA2-secure algorithm is ok? Are others not ok? How does the paragraph enable me to decide anything and when might a decision arise (if at all)? (I’m not really asking, I’m saying that these questions might arise and a bit more explanation might clarify things. I’m not suggesting a sentence either, since I am not exactly sure what the aim of this paragraph is.) (Addressed)
b) In 10.3 switch the explanation around: Explain IND-CCA2 first, then name the algorithms and then (if the idea in a) is acted upon) provide the additional context. (Addressed)
c) Rename 10.3 “Security notion”. It’s only one property, but the title is “.. propertieS”. That might be confusing, like something’s missing. (Addressed)
d) Rename 11.2 to match 10.3 (Addressed)
e) Like for 10.3, switch the explanation to the front + add a sentence for context at the end in 11.2 (Addressed)