IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dcrup] Hey, crypto experts, what signing algorithm should we add

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Sat, 10 June 2017 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5B0D1205D3 for <dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WibYp1lCfcPO for <dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb0-x22f.google.com (mail-yb0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1317C1200E5 for <dcrup@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id f192so20711798yba.2 for <dcrup@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kupM61LZdF0LFEdxsQnwuzuW1NtAPnu+3/M/VHW8vZk=; b=KjQDKgaNL0fpwOWWPbZ8olXTQmz5Ef6W4n7KaVaATxiMBlwGyFvhWDl2FAfG+ZhvL5 AttPDdIb7DfUYfuwM6a0CLRQsyQX6c9wtXt4E5qaJ1SXv0zf/NdAnixxGIn6F4rd5gKd bKEQiP8N1jsu9DpQJXyJ+xS4pKGrZ3j05pLomnOEH3eQP43f9cCROe8neULhlpdemL7H kebiVzTVH6HBvEPznaRJ/jeCcnm1mzhpYFuH+nrB3dN4vf3bimCquvFcztU5GtyynvpK Yee4Yd0WB6C7iL6UvfvBEIcKzSAndJocvxWpGkcUT+jpk/jAiE8GrCDHQEKytPC6Pph+ 9diw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kupM61LZdF0LFEdxsQnwuzuW1NtAPnu+3/M/VHW8vZk=; b=R3akIasg5SbetRG6RX/J27689fn+RJrAz8gFvIP5Osfub2Yss5gD609kz/rntbI4cM aidR2Zr/G03dUPcyx4GK/gZz6YjBPFAvyf4C/v9TLMfq373idNi3PJGUmXEenah20zMl HQaSnr+xHsuTxUxGR7Pc/X0tpOpaYryKfF+2wCuT+Oa1E7MZ8khwjHghINhNW2mRJu/a GFi0atMG26CbV3+8NN2oyqKBb4DpO6NYqBWXPejU+sfxxqGG+gw97CTXTbvhFYKBX74e XxeOVLLq+sT7NLmSrXTnwbdaZpljs2ulY/f4ZNjGdixXLQeWhuTXQ6z/p1KZQf5LzqbY iJ/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCN/DvyIGi90pvmULbfwOeBGS5qdJ8Mbuel4ggTPWpjEtU7Ik3r wDYwGpK9RLRSGahHcEqML6KgFcGfpDjnrJnXUQ==
X-Received: by 10.37.177.164 with SMTP id h36mr19357959ybj.15.1497113523339; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.13.215.144 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 09:51:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1706101211200.16559@ary.qy>
References: <20170610125545.14232.qmail@ary.lan> <CABkgnnUAJ6ix3pMB_Y792QOCqRSp2qA9oTSyUCbXP_=P5HRwGA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMAmjVaJCJwB-qZSpTX0aS-oi1mTduHCdLCM33dWj9P-Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1706101205270.16559@ary.qy> <CABcZeBM_P4C8xYDmMEbhAbs1tVPVWk6+UgT7vAcktSNtjVyXCg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1706101211200.16559@ary.qy>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 17:51:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CABcZeBN9r9XdsJVayMcUE03WJv74MOsefVdwb-CdchVbaKdT1Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: dcrup@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045eaaa4bf6f8d05519de7d0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dcrup/XmetojK-rjAlko0QKA0NyJCMTsw>
Subject: Re: [Dcrup] Hey, crypto experts, what signing algorithm should we add
X-BeenThere: dcrup@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DKIM Crypto Update <dcrup.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dcrup>, <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dcrup/>
List-Post: <mailto:dcrup@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcrup>, <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:52:07 -0000

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 5:11 PM, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> Great.  How about the sign/verify interface compared to RSA ?  RSA has a
>>> length parameter but I gather that's in the blob of base64 key info.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by a length parameter. Length of what?
>>
>
> The key.
>

Hmmm... That's not really part of the standard RSA signing interface that
I'm familiar with. See for instance [0].. Can you send me a pointer to what
you have in mind.

-Ekr

[0] https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Manual:RSA_sign(3)

>
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status