Milestone-Proposal talk:Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)

Advocates’ Checklist

1. Is proposal for an achievement rather than for a person? If the citation includes a person's name, have the proposers provided the required justification for inclusion of the person's name?
2. Was proposed achievement a significant advance rather than an incremental improvement to an existing technology?
3. Were there prior or contemporary achievements of a similar nature?
4. Has the achievement truly led to a functioning, useful, or marketable technology?
5. Is proposal adequately supported by significant references (minimum of five) such as patents, contemporary newspaper articles, journal articles, or citations to pages in scholarly books? At least one of the references from a peer-reviewed scholarly book or journal article. The full text of the material, not just the references, shall be present. If the supporting texts are copyright-encumbered and cannot be posted on the ETHW for intellectual property reasons, the proposers shall email a copy to the History Center so that it can be forwarded to the advocate. If the advocate does not consider the supporting references sufficient, the advocate may ask the proposer(s) for additional ones.
6. Are the scholarly references sufficiently recent?
7. Is proposed citation readable and understandable by the general public?
8. Does the proposed plaque site fulfill the requirements? Is the address complete? Are the GPS coordinates correct and in decimal format?
9. Is the proposal quality comparable to that of IEEE publications?
10. Scientific and technical units correct? (e.g. km, mm, hertz, etc.) Are acronyms correct and properly upperercased or lowercased?
11. Date formats correct as specified in Section 6 of Milestones Program Guidelines? https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/Helpful_Hints_on_Citations,_Plaque_Locations

Reviewers’ Checklist

1. Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?
2. Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?
3. Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?
4. Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Comment to Proposers -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 05:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Dear Proposers.

ETHW Main Page describes as follows. "To be proposed as an IEEE Milestone, an achievement must be at least 25 years old." https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/Main_Page

On the other hand, Abstract in NIST FIP197 describes as follows. "In 2000, NIST announced the selection of the Rijndael block cipher family as the winner of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) competition." https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/197/final

I think the AES deserves surely the IEEE Milestone. However, I think it will be 1-2 years before you can apply for the IEEE Milestone. It is reason why the design time frame is generally uncertain and therefore unsuitable for the IEEE Milestone.

Best regards, Dr. Tomohiro Hase, IEEE Fellow.

Original Citation Title and Text -- Administrator4 (talk) 17:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Design of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Rijndael 1995-1998

In 1995-1998, Joan Daemen and Vincent Rijmen designed a series of secure and innovative block ciphers. This culminated in Rijndael, their submission to the first worldwide open NIST contest: the AES competition. After winning this in 2000, Rijndael, now AES, became ubiquitous in providing data confidentiality and authenticity worldwide.