FIPS202: Add shake128[x4]_init() to FIPS202 API #686
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
5 tasks
This commit extends the FIPS202 API by an explicit init function. This is not used by the FIPS202 implementation shipped with mlkem-native itself, but may be handy for consumers that wish to provide their own FIPS202 implementation. It also makes the API more symmetric, since we already have a `xxx_release()` API. Signed-off-by: Hanno Becker <[email protected]>
hanno-becker
force-pushed
the
shake_init
branch
from
89a6b14 to
6eafb0f
Compare
mkannwischer
approved these changes
Jan 23, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This commit extends the FIPS202 API by an explicit init function. This is not used by the FIPS202 implementation shipped with mlkem-native itself, but may be handy for consumers that wish to provide their own FIPS202 implementation. It also makes the API more symmetric, since we already have a
xxx_release()API.Suggested by @bhess in open-quantum-safe/liboqs#2041