IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Followup on fingerprints

Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse> Thu, 06 August 2015 16:08 UTC

Return-Path: <look@my.amazin.horse>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3CE1B3AE9 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 09:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 cMA6upUxI8Me for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.mugenguild.com (mugenguild.com [5.135.189.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25FC81B3B0D for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 09:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (gate.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de [134.169.34.1]) by mail.mugenguild.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 06C365FD99; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 18:04:01 +0200 (CEST)
References: <87twsn2wcz.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <CAMm+LwgRJX-SvydmpUAJMmN3yysi4zzGSpO2yY4JAMhD-9xLgQ@mail.gmail.com> <87zj2ecmv8.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <CAMm+LwgKmcTes=V7uS3MjCQixWCo-i7PY=VE7eCHSqt3Ho3OSg@mail.gmail.com> <87a8udd4u6.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <sjm61503182.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <CAMm+LwgEVySpfL-iN2uzX-4tu7R+isDkHE9D8uAeLTxxd4VxqQ@mail.gmail.com> <sjmwpxc1kbv.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <CAAS2fgR6LYck+km5Ze6S9z65ZgsR61d8md2CqojDaceZ0OrZrw@mail.gmail.com> <9c2c8c5df67c83925d7e3c21fe943483.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <20150803173231.GG3067@straylight.m.ringlet.net> <2439a89a6c4eb70044e144406a732482.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <87io8v7uqt.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box> <87h9of7p0e.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box> <87wpxbtuwk.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <CAAu18hez49oVhTwRLqv=3rifbg5q5+EqsSvBO0c-ezq+M_Qmyw@mail.gmail.com> <87614u4u7q.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <55C3836D.2040104@iang.org>
From: Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse>
To: ianG <iang@iang.org>
In-reply-to: <55C3836D.2040104@iang.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 18:07:57 +0200
Message-ID: <87d1z0763m.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/0reL0IX_qFeCNlKbw7Ea_1x8YN8>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Followup on fingerprints
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 16:08:36 -0000

On 6 Aug 2015, ianG wrote:

> I'll bite: A person with two keys can sign a document that holds
> him, then announce that it wasn't signed by him.

Even though two keys exists with the same fingerprint, a signature made
by one will only check out with that one, so creating ambiguous
signatures is not that simple unless the attacker can also freely choose
which one of the two keys will be used for verification.  Also keep in
mind that certificates are made over public key material, not only
fingerprints.

> As proof, he can anonymously publish his other key...

Yes, well.  He could also publish this key if it wasn't a collided one,
or simply state that it was compromised.  Which leads us to the same old
discussion about the usefulness of non-repudiation in practice.

 - V

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email