Re: [Ietf-dkim] RFC 8463: DNS textual form underspecified

[Steffen Nurpmeso <[e-mail]>]

Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
 <20240414005126.pzjJO4pr@steffen%sdaoden.eu>:
 |Thanks to Hanno Böck (known from ossec and more) i was pointed to
 |my falsely published ED25519 DKIM key.
 |Until now that simply was the complete ED25519 public key, just
 |like for RSA, instead of extracting the actual "bitstring data"
 |from the standardized ASN.1 container, which starts at offset 16
 |(or -offset=12 if you use "openssl asn1parse -noout -out -" aka
 |the binary blob).
 |
 |I realize that RFC 8463 says repeatedly that the base64-encoded
 |representation of an ED25519 key is 44 bytes, and that the
 |examples go for this.  Still there is no wording that the entire
 |ASN.1 structure shall be thrown away.

That cannot be the reason Google, Microsoft and more do not
support that, right.  It is a bit bizarre that these huge RSA keys
are used all over the place, whereas the even stripped-naked ones
are not.

A nice Sunday i wish to everyone, if at all possible.
Ciao from Germany,

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)