CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 576Cryptography and Data SecurityCryptography and Residue ArithmeticQuantum Information and Cryptography

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 15 are not checked yet.

Module-lattice-based key-encapsulation mechanism standard

Open access
National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)·2024
DOI 10.6028/nist.fips.203
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A key-encapsulation mechanism (KEM) is a set of algorithms that, under certain conditions, can be used by two parties to establish a shared secret key over a public channel. A shared secret key that is securely established using a KEM can then be used with symmetric-key cryptographic algorithms to perform basic tasks in secure communications, such as encryption and authentication. This standard specifies a key-encapsulation mechanism called ML-KEM. The security of ML-KEM is related to the computational difficulty of the Module Learning with Errors problem. At present,ML-KEM is believed to be secure, even against adversaries who possess a quantum computer. This standard specifies three parameter sets for ML-KEM. In order of increasing security strength and decreasing performance, these are ML-KEM-512, ML-KEM-768, and ML-KEM-1024.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.6028/nist.fips.203

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Chen L (2022) Recommendation for key derivation using pseudorandom functions, (National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD), NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-108r1-upd1, Includes updates as of February 2, 2024. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP. 800-108r1-upd1. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 576

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
Publisher
National Institute of Standards and Technology (U.S.)
Published
2024-08-13
DOI
10.6028/nist.fips.203
OpenAlex
W4401459825
Cited by
268
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 184 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 8
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI), the national research institute for mathematics and computer science in the Netherlands (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Cryptography and Data Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cryptography and Residue Arithmetic
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
Keywords
key encapsulation mechanism, ML-KEM, module lattices, module learning with errors, post-quantum cryptography, key establishment, shared secret key, lattice-based cryptography, parameter sets

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review