Preface to Volume 2024, Issue 1

IACR Transactions on Symmetric Cryptology (ToSC) is a forum for original results in all areas of symmetric cryptography, including the design and analysis of block ciphers, stream ciphers, encryption schemes, hash functions, message authentication codes, (cryptographic) permutations, authenticated encryption schemes, cryptanalysis and evaluation tools, and security issues and solutions regarding their implementation.ToSC implements an open-access journal/conference hybrid model following some other communities in computer science.All articles undergo a journal-style reviewing process and accepted papers are published in diamond open access (in our case the Creative Commons License CC-BY 4.0).The review procedures that we have followed strictly adhere to the traditions of the journal world.The ToSC review process strives to maintain a high quality of published articles.Full papers are assigned to at least three members of the Editorial Board; for submissions by Editorial Board members this was increased to at least four.These members write detailed and careful reviews (usually without relying on subreviewers).Moreover, we have had a rebuttal phase, allowing authors to respond to the review comments before the final decisions.If necessary, the review process enables further interactions between the authors and the reviewers, mediated by the Co-Editors-in-Chief.The Editorial Board can also decide to ask for a minor or major revision of the paper when changes are deemed necessary to improve its quality.Furthermore, the Editorial Board can give a "reject and resubmit" decision in case a submission is considered to have potential, but there are significant issues to address before it can be properly evaluated.Next to regular submissions, ToSC also accepts submissions of addendum and corrigendum papers.Addendum papers aim at extending an existing ToSC paper in a novel, yet succinct way.Corrigendum papers aim at correcting an error in an existing ToSC paper.Overall, we are very pleased with the quality and quantity of submissions, the detailed review reports written by the reviewers and the substantial efforts by the authors to further improve the quality of their work.We think that the review process,