Notes.txt

- Write-up:
  > First, blog posts SandboxAQ, then eprint/submission (or also partly simultaneously with blog post).
  > Might want to have more results and clean up previous parts for the submission.
  
ML-KEM Binding propertiers to prove:
- BIND-K-X are big ones
- BIND-K,PK-CT?
- BIND-K,CT-PK?


RSA-KEM/'RSASVE' used in protocol vulnerable to binding-related attack (https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/227/ipd), show lack of binding properties?
- See also: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-56Br2.pdf



(Comments on) Changes to KeyEncapsulationMechanisms[ROM].eca:
> For the oracle module types, stick with functor types for now.
  Seems to be the most reasonable option with current features.
  (Indeed, accepting the fact the user is required to always instantiate modules of the oracle type with a scheme, even if potentially unwanted.
   However, since this often can be circumvented, e.g., by specifying a non-functor oracle local module in proofs, this seems to be least bad option.)
  Potentially can provide a default "Null" scheme, i.e., a default dummy scheme that for which each procedure does nothing or only return witness.
  Users can then use this to instantate oracles with when passing an actual scheme is not needed/wanted.
> Keep the distribution mapping as a "model" for dependent types (e.g., for KEMs, modeling the fact that the shared key space can depend on the public key by sampling the keys from a distribution that depends on the value of the considered public key)
> Remove the dependency on PROM, and simply define only the RO interface necessary for the files themselves.
  This interface should still match the (relevant part of) the PROM interface for consistency.
  E.g., for KEMs in the ROM, only consider input/output types, and init + get procedures for the interface.
  Eventually, when integrating the theory, can have CI check an example that uses stuff from PROM for the RO stuff in the KEM properties.
  This way, CI will still trigger in  case of arising inconsistencies between the KEM-ROM theory and PROM.
> For now, keep the Relations theory in the library file.
> Change format of module parameterizations to have EACH individual module parameter encapsulated (in parentheses).
  So, remove any sequence of comma-separated module parameters within parentheses.
> For now, leave derandomization modeling as is. Further discussion/evaluation required.