Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a component-based assessment framework for evaluating application-level cryptographic agility, addressing the challenges posed by the transition to post-quantum cryptography. By systematically decomposing cryptographic agility into seven orthogonal dimensions, the framework highlights critical gaps in existing APIs, such as the lack of intent-based key creation and policy-driven algorithm selection. Evaluating six representative APIs reveals that these deficiencies hinder agile migration, underscoring the need for improved cryptographic API design to facilitate the transition to new algorithms.
Existing cryptographic APIs are fundamentally unprepared for the post-quantum transition, with critical gaps that could stall agile migration efforts.
The impending post-quantum transition to new cryptography will require complete replacement of algorithms within all software. The cryptographic APIs used today make this transition challenging because they were not designed with agility as a concern. There is no method for systematically assessing cryptographic agility as an overall ability. In addition to this, the term itself refers to multiple independent capabilities. Specifically, it includes replacing algorithms, selecting by policy, and substituting implementations. This lack of structured decomposition limits both the evaluation of systems and the development of cryptographically agile APIs. We introduce a component-based assessment framework that characterizes application-level cryptographic agility along seven orthogonal dimensions: three coupling dimensions that measure what the application code knows about algorithms and providers, a cross-cutting decoupling mechanism, a governance authority dimension, and two agility enablers that measure actual migration capability. The framework is non-linear and captures non-hierarchical profiles: a system may achieve high operation decoupling yet low creation decoupling, or strong versioning without externalized configuration. We evaluate six representative APIs (PKCS#11, OpenSSL~3.0, JCA, Google Tink, AWS KMS, and HashiCorp Vault Transit) against the framework, revealing three pervasive and independent gaps: no system supports intent-based key creation, none provides policy-driven algorithm selection (as distinct from access control), and none offers dedicated/first-class operations for algorithm transformation of existing keys. These gaps are individually sufficient to prevent agile migration, explaining why the post-quantum transition remains a software engineering problem despite decades of API progress.
