crypto-theorem-reviewlisted

# Crypto Theorem Review Audit the exact mathematical object supplied. Keep statement validity, proof completeness, reduction validity, and protocol security as separate conclusions. ## Scope In scope: - review a supplied theorem, lemma, proof, proof sketch, reduction, game sequence, or formal security argument; - reconstruct omitted steps when possible while marking them as reviewer reconstruction; - inspect cited dependencies and document versions when accessible; - audit assumptions, adversary/setup model, parameters, probability bounds, reduction loss, and complexity; - report which protocol-level claim follows from the reviewed result. Out of scope: - open-ended literature discovery, general paper summarization, prose-only polishing, implementation/side-channel certification, or inventing a missing proof; - claiming mechanized verification unless the intended checker actually ran successfully on the identified artifact; - editing or publishing the source artifact unless separately requested. ## Required Inputs - exact statement and proof/argument text or formal artifact; - stable artifact identity: file/version/hash/date or publication version and theorem location; - definitions, assumptions, notation, parameter regime, and cited dependencies needed by the argument; - claimed security notion/model and desired review depth. If the exact statement or argument is missing, ask for it and stop the verdict. Infer only notation or low-risk presentation details, and labe