Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

0.7.0 release candidate 1 #533

Merged
6 commits merged into from
Oct 8, 2024
Merged

0.7.0 release candidate 1 #533

6 commits merged into from
Oct 8, 2024

Conversation

praveksharma
Copy link
Member

@praveksharma praveksharma commented Oct 4, 2024

Please see the relevant pre-release (currently in draft): https://github.com/open-quantum-safe/oqs-provider/releases/tag/untagged-af15abfacccde382a3d8

This updates the version string, the release notes, and points CI to liboqs 0.11.0.

Checks done:

  • Stable under generate.py.
  • CI is green.
  • 'LIBOQS_BRANCH=0.11.0 ./scripts/fullbuild.sh -F && ./scripts/runtests.sh -V` runs OK.
  • Passing release-tests.sh with liboqs 0.11.0 and openssl 3.3.2.
  • nginx, curl, and httpd docker images building OK.

This PR will not land; once approved, a new 0.7.0-release will be created which will be merged.

Signed-off-by: Pravek Sharma <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Pravek Sharma <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Pravek Sharma <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Pravek Sharma <[email protected]>
@praveksharma praveksharma requested a review from SWilson4 October 4, 2024 23:22
@praveksharma praveksharma marked this pull request as ready for review October 5, 2024 00:07
Copy link
Member

@baentsch baentsch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Thanks very much for putting this together @praveksharma ! Only question pertains to rationale for fixing certain openssl version references (why move from 3.1 to 3.2; why not to latest in respective branch?)

RELEASE.md Outdated
* Adds support for CROSS from Round 1 of [NIST’s Post-Quantum Signature On-Ramp process](https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/pqc-dig-sig/round-1-additional-signatures).
* Updates ML-KEM's code points in line with internet draft [draft-kwiatkowski-tls-ecdhe-mlkem-02](https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-kwiatkowski-tls-ecdhe-mlkem-02.html).
* Updates the `fullbuild.sh` build script to build against liboqs with formally verified Kyber-512 and Kyber-768 from [libjade](https://github.com/formosa-crypto/libjade) turned on by default; see `OQS_LIBJADE_BUILD` under `CONFIGURE.md` for more information.
* Reverses keyshares for X25519MLKEM768, SecP256r1MLKEM768, and X448-ML-KEM-768 TLS hybrids in line with [draft-kwiatkowski-tls-ecdhe-mlkem-02](https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-kwiatkowski-tls-ecdhe-mlkem-02.html).
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Only the X25519 and X448 hybrids have been reversed ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd hope so. Thanks for the catch @ghen2 . @praveksharma please remove P256 from the list.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This has been fixed, thank you @ghen2.

@baentsch baentsch self-requested a review October 5, 2024 09:07
@praveksharma praveksharma mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2024
@praveksharma
Copy link
Member Author

Only question pertains to rationale for fixing certain openssl version references (why move from 3.1 to 3.2; why not to latest in respective branch?)

This was an oversight, thank you for pointing this out @baentsch. I have changed this to openssl 3.3.2 which is the latest release.

The draft pre-release has been published. The PR for the release, #534, is up for review and includes the change suggested here.

@praveksharma praveksharma closed this pull request by merging all changes into main in 2615bba Oct 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants