Re: RFC: DSA key lengths; Elgamal type 16 v. type 20

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Sun, 25 August 2002 12:46 UTC

Received: from above.proper.com (mail.proper.com [208.184.76.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA08705 for <openpgp-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 08:46:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g7PCboD11746 for ietf-openpgp-bks; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 05:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from porta.u64.de (porta.u64.de [194.77.88.106]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g7PCbl211734 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 05:37:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uucp by kasiski.gnupg.de with local-rmail (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian)) id 17ixqA-0001hS-00; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 15:54:06 +0200
Received: from wk by alberti.gnupg.de with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17iwhp-0000cV-00; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:41:25 +0200
To: OpenPGP <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: DSA key lengths; Elgamal type 16 v. type 20
References: <B98DCB9B.7D7A%jon@callas.org>
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
X-PGP-KeyID: 621CC013
X-Request-PGP: finger://wk@g10code.com
X-FSFE-Info: http://fsfeurope.org
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:41:25 +0200
In-Reply-To: <B98DCB9B.7D7A%jon@callas.org> (Jon Callas's message of "Sat, 24 Aug 2002 23:47:39 -0700")
Message-ID: <87bs7r156y.fsf@alberti.gnupg.de>
Lines: 27
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/20.7 (i386-debian-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>

On Sat, 24 Aug 2002 23:47:39 -0700, Jon Callas said:

> Well, there are people who believe that Elgamal signatures should be
> deprecated, and were a mistake to put in the standard to begin with. I think

FWIW, the reason I implemented ElGamal for signature and encryption in
GnuPG was simply the fact that at I initially was not aware of the PGP
5 data format and there used to be claims that DSA may lead to similar
patent problems as we had with RSA.

> it's better to leave it as it is and let gentle persons continue to
> disagree.

I agree with Jon.  There are only 28 type 20 keys on the keyservers
and I see see no reason to promote the use of this type.  I'd like to
remove it from GnuPG but some folks more or less convinced me that
type 20 support should stay in GnuPG (in expert mode).


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner