Timeverse Security Profile
Crypto-Agile, PQ-Ready Security for TSAE, Q-Address, and Optional Clockchain Anchoring
Abstract
This document specifies a crypto-agile security layer for Timeverse-based coordination systems that use phase-window scheduling (Q-Address) and auditable event anchoring (TSAE / optional Clockchain anchoring). The profile enforces a core rule: Timeverse timing and addressing fields are public context, not secrets. Security is provided by standard cryptographic primitives: signatures for authenticity, nonces and window-gating policies for replay protection, hash commitments for auditability, and optional session encryption using KEM+HKDF+AEAD. The profile is post-quantum ready: algorithm suites can migrate to NIST PQ standards (ML-KEM, ML-DSA, SLH-DSA) without changing Timeverse semantics.
Normative dependencies
- Conventions: 10.5281/zenodo.18068999
- Q-Address: 10.5281/zenodo.18068997
1. Scope
Principle 1.1 (Context is not secret): All Timeverse timing and addressing fields (cycle index, phase, HS displays, SWT labels, tiles, Q-Address fields, TSAE fields) MUST be treated as public context. They may be used as associated data (AAD) for domain separation, but MUST NOT be treated as secrets.
Remark 1.1: This profile defines security requirements for authenticity, integrity, and replay resistance. It does not guarantee clock accuracy or synchronization; those are handled by bootstrapping and estimation layers.
2. Security profile identifier and suite registry
Definition 2.1 (Security profile identifier):
Every signed or encrypted object MUST declare a versioned security_profile_id. This identifier selects a suite that fixes: canonical encoding, hash, signature scheme, (optional) KEM/KDF/AEAD, nonce rules, and replay-horizon policy parameters.
Definition 2.2 (Suite registry (normative)):
A deployment MUST maintain a registry mapping security_profile_id to a complete suite specification. Verification MUST be performed strictly according to the declared suite.
3. Security-relevant subsets (tick-canonical)
Definition 3.1 (Q-Address security subset (tick-canonical)):
A security-relevant Q-Address subset is:
Qsec ≡ (qaddr_schema, convention_id, scope, cycle_index, resolution = R, phi_ticks, deltaPhi_ticks, slot)
Definition 3.2 (TSAE security subset (tick-canonical)):
A security-relevant TSAE subset is:
TSAEsec ≡ (tsae_schema, convention_id, scope, cycle_index, resolution = R, phi_ticks, action_hash, signer_id)
where this release recommends tsae_schema=TV-TSAE-2025-12.
Remark 3.1 (No floats in signed semantics): Signed/verified objects MUST use canonical fixed-point tick fields. Float displays (HS degrees, SWT labels) are UI-only and MUST NOT be used for verification or boundary checks.
4. Replay protection (normative)
Definition 4.1 (Window gating and anti-replay):
A verifier MUST reject a message/receipt if:
- signature verification fails under the declared security_profile_id, or
- the cycle index is outside the accepted policy range, or
- tick context is inconsistent with the referenced window (when applicable), or
- the nonce has already been accepted within the replay horizon.
Remark 4.1 (Nonce database (recommended)):
Implementations SHOULD maintain a nonce database keyed by at least
(security_profile_id, signer_id, scope, cycle_index, nonce)
for a horizon defined by the suite/policy.
5. Optional confidentiality (informative)
Remark 5.1 (KEM + HKDF + AEAD): When confidentiality is required, use KEM+HKDF+AEAD with Timeverse context as AAD. HKDF is standardized in RFC 5869 and a standard AEAD option is ChaCha20-Poly1305 (RFC 8439) [3, 4]. Post-quantum suites may use NIST PQ primitives (ML-KEM, ML-DSA, SLH-DSA) [5, 6, 7].
6. Conclusion
This Security Profile defines a practical security layer for phase-window coordination and auditable event anchoring. It separates public context (Timeverse/Q-Address fields) from cryptographic secrets (keys/shared secrets), and supports crypto-agility (including PQ migration) via suite identifiers and canonical encodings.
References
- [1] T. Ouardi, Phase-Coordination Series Conventions, Zenodo (2025). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18068999.
- [2] T. Ouardi, Q-Address: Macro Phase + Micro Slot, Zenodo (2025). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18068997.
- [3] H. Krawczyk and P. Eronen, HMAC-based Extract-and-Expand Key Derivation Function (HKDF), RFC 5869 (2010). https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5869
- [4] Y. Nir and A. Langley, ChaCha20 and Poly1305 for IETF Protocols, RFC 8439 (2018). https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8439
- [5] NIST, FIPS 203: Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism Standard (ML-KEM), 2024. https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/203/final
- [6] NIST, FIPS 204: Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Standard (ML-DSA), 2024. https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/204/final
- [7] NIST, FIPS 205: Stateless Hash-Based Digital Signature Standard (SLH-DSA), 2024. https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/205/final