Script updating gh-pages from fe7316e. [ci skip]

bas/daniel/draft-ietf-lamps-kyber-certificates.html

@@ -1497,7 +1497,7 @@ <h2 id="name-security-considerations">
 <p id="section-7-6">Many protocols only rely on the IND-CCA security of a KEM. Some
 (implicitly) require further binding properties, formalized
 in <span>[<a href="#CDM23" class="cite xref">CDM23</a>]</span>.
-The key format influences these binding properties.
+The private key format influences these binding properties.
 Per <span>[<a href="#KEMMY24" class="cite xref">KEMMY24</a>]</span>, ML-KEM is LEAK-BIND-K-PK-secure and
 LEAK-BIND-K-CT-secure when using the expanded private key format,
 but not MAL-BIND-K-CT nor MAL-BIND-K-PK.

bas/daniel/draft-ietf-lamps-kyber-certificates.txt

@@ -341,12 +341,12 @@ Table of Contents
 
    Many protocols only rely on the IND-CCA security of a KEM.  Some
    (implicitly) require further binding properties, formalized in
-   [CDM23].  The key format influences these binding properties.  Per
-   [KEMMY24], ML-KEM is LEAK-BIND-K-PK-secure and LEAK-BIND-K-CT-secure
-   when using the expanded private key format, but not MAL-BIND-K-CT nor
-   MAL-BIND-K-PK.  Using the 64-byte seed format provides a step up in
-   binding security, providing MAL-BIND-K-CT, but still not MAL-BIND-
-   K-PK.  For more guidance, see
+   [CDM23].  The private key format influences these binding properties.
+   Per [KEMMY24], ML-KEM is LEAK-BIND-K-PK-secure and LEAK-BIND-K-CT-
+   secure when using the expanded private key format, but not MAL-BIND-
+   K-CT nor MAL-BIND-K-PK.  Using the 64-byte seed format provides a
+   step up in binding security, providing MAL-BIND-K-CT, but still not
+   MAL-BIND-K-PK.  For more guidance, see
    [I-D.sfluhrer-cfrg-ml-kem-security-considerations].
 
 8.  IANA Considerations