Additional FOM 3.0 question

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Additional FOM 3.0 question

Pete

Hello,

I know you guys are right now working hard to deliver the first alpha
drop very soon, and that this first drop may include the initial
functionality of the new FIPS support.  We know that the intention is to
obtain one last 140-2 validation for the new 3.0 FOM, and it sounds like
it's still going to be possible for downstream groups to leverage the
the small number of OE validations so long as we follow the proper build
process.  This is all really good to hear. 

By any chance has there been any discussion yet regarding what will and
will not be in the new 3.0 FOM?  If I recall correctly, the content list
for the now defunct 1.1.1 based FOM was very long and complete.  Our
team is in the planning stages for migrating to 3.0.0.  Knowing that the
window for -2 validations is currently 9/22/2021 also plays into our
planning effort.  If we need to develop a supplemental, or ancillary,
FOM provider for 3.0 to include content that we need that did not make
into the core 3.0 FOM we, too, would like to get one last -2 validation in.

Again, I know you are focusing right now on this big first release, so
even just a date for date for when a rough list could be available would
help us in planning.  Something to put on a slide that says when we
might know if we have additional work to do and what it might be.

Thanks again very much for all you're doing,
Pete
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional FOM 3.0 question

Matt Caswell-2


On 08/04/2020 17:11, Pete wrote:
> By any chance has there been any discussion yet regarding what will and
> will not be in the new 3.0 FOM?  If I recall correctly, the content list
> for the now defunct 1.1.1 based FOM was very long and complete.  Our
> team is in the planning stages for migrating to 3.0.0.  Knowing that the
> window for -2 validations is currently 9/22/2021 also plays into our
> planning effort.  If we need to develop a supplemental, or ancillary,
> FOM provider for 3.0 to include content that we need that did not make
> into the core 3.0 FOM we, too, would like to get one last -2 validation in.

By "the content list" I assume you mean the list of algorithms that we
plan to validate. If you take a look at Appendix 3 of our original
design doc you can see the planned list:

https://www.openssl.org/docs/OpenSSL300Design.html

Matt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Additional FOM 3.0 question

Pete
Excellent.  That's exactly what I was looking for.  Sorry for missing
that down at the bottom.

Thanks again,
Pete

On 4/8/20 12:34 PM, Matt Caswell wrote:

>
> On 08/04/2020 17:11, Pete wrote:
>> By any chance has there been any discussion yet regarding what will and
>> will not be in the new 3.0 FOM?  If I recall correctly, the content list
>> for the now defunct 1.1.1 based FOM was very long and complete.  Our
>> team is in the planning stages for migrating to 3.0.0.  Knowing that the
>> window for -2 validations is currently 9/22/2021 also plays into our
>> planning effort.  If we need to develop a supplemental, or ancillary,
>> FOM provider for 3.0 to include content that we need that did not make
>> into the core 3.0 FOM we, too, would like to get one last -2 validation in.
> By "the content list" I assume you mean the list of algorithms that we
> plan to validate. If you take a look at Appendix 3 of our original
> design doc you can see the planned list:
>
> https://www.openssl.org/docs/OpenSSL300Design.html
>
> Matt