Why do they want non-hybrid KEMs and signatures, anyway? Seems like a bad idea to protect all of everything with nothing but unproven crypto.
@argv_minus_one I have an introductory chart https://blog.cr.yp.to/20260221-structure.html showing the arguments and counterarguments.
Most common argument from proponents: NSA is asking for non-hybrids, ergo support non-hybrids. This argument works for (1) companies chasing NSA money, (2) companies that take any excuse for extra options as a barrier to entry for competitors, and (3) people who think that "NSA Cybersecurity" isn't a conduit for https://www.eff.org/files/2014/04/09/20130905-guard-sigint_enabling.pdf but rather an independent pro-security agency.
Do you have another explanation for the inexplicable push for the IETF to specify non-hybrid ML-KEM?
I looked at the list of arguments compiled by @djb at https://blog.cr.yp.to/20260221-structure.html and I don't see any particularly compelling argument in favor of such a move. Nor can I think of one myself. Certainly nothing to justify going full speed ahead like this.