If it is, the fine must be large enough to matter against the backdrop of corporate P&L. Courts have an entire category for this type of fine: punitive damages.

Demonstrating a 'pattern or practice' is the legal standard one has to meet to bust qualified immunity and shift the burden of doubt on to authorities, so I'd say it goes a fair amount past 'reasonable suspicion', which in a court is itself enough to issue search warrants.

2: And? You're missing a second part to this statement. Did you intend it to support some conclusion?

> blind paranoia

Characterizing criticism this way, instead of listening, internalizing, and adjusting your position is exactly why DJB's references to previous NSA interference stick. Y'all don't just have technical differences, you're going for character assassination. DJB has been consistent and explicit about the technical nature of his objections. I find his prose on the matter clear and well reasoned.

Your arguments seem disjointed, unorganized, specious, and lacking, in comparison, and less credible for the way you respond.

> I just don't think it is sensible to attempt to "ban" the usage of pure ML-KEM by not standardizing it. It won't work! It'll just increase the risk of non-interoperable implementations.

I think it's entirely reasonable to dissuade people from building non-hybrid systems during a transition period, and refusing to standardize them is an entirely reasonable way to signal that people shouldn't build or trust such systems during such a time, even stronger than a recommended_to_implement = N. No one has attempted to "ban" anything, so that's another gross mischaracterization.

Wanting to standardize it's use without the secondary layer of protection provided by existing algorithms over the objections of a well known cryptographer counts as a hint to me.

In the same way that paying RSA to make Dual-EC DRBG the default RNG in it's security products when it was newer and more expensive than alternatives was a hint.

He's also responded directly to criticisms: https://nsa.2026.action.cr.yp.to/guide.html

By comparison the so-called "unprofessional behavior" cited is the sort of subjective abject procedural bureaucratic bullpucky often used to shut down inconveniently correct criticism.

These realtek 10gbe chips are more in the range of the Pi Zero class machines (0.5W idle, 2W loaded) which don't often come with heatsinks though they might benefit from them. If it has a good thermal connection to a good thick ground plane on the PCB, that's worth almost as much as a passive heatsink on the top of the chip.

usb-c < card edge < motherboard integrated in terms of how much heat can be transfered through the connection. Where the motherboard would have the largest ground plane to soak up heat from such an IC and dissipate it passively. The usb-c module is worst case by being a small enclosed box with very little thermal connection through the plastic insulating housing. An aluminum enclosure might dissipate enough heat passively to make it pleasant to use.

Either all information is stolen, or none is. Can't have it both ways.