IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Fingerprints

ianG <iang@iang.org> Mon, 13 April 2015 17:58 UTC

Return-Path: <iang@iang.org>
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 053101AD241 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001] 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 8kO9hhkVoOWG for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from virulha.pair.com (virulha.pair.com [209.68.5.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 569F11AD190 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tormenta.local (iang.org [209.197.106.187]) by virulha.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D540A6D784; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 13:58:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <552C03CF.3020001@iang.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:58:39 +0100
From: ianG <iang@iang.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: openpgp@ietf.org
References: <CAMm+LwhbB+-MnGRBCvprgAGOuu+5CJ2rgod7EBGOQR5UNVrspQ@mail.gmail.com> <87y4m0ozlt.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <sjmk2xkf2t8.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <CA+cU71=M2JzBkJXgUYCgp=Q=0c_7UuZWY14myA6cpMRwKt+Hjg@mail.gmail.com> <87sic4jwzx.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <1428939645.12460.1.camel@scientia.net> <CAMm+LwigZ2raZDdBQ1CLdUE0iuhfnBvTj6M=5bWHkGdxXcYG_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwigZ2raZDdBQ1CLdUE0iuhfnBvTj6M=5bWHkGdxXcYG_w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/6n3w-a1TDmJM0kZAxvM4mb2qylY>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] 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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:58:44 -0000

On 13/04/2015 18:32 pm, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

> Given the way fingerprints are used, there is an intense pressure to
> use a single algorithm for everything. That is why I think that we
> should pick either SHA-2-512 or SHA-3-512 and truncate as necessary.


If SHA-2-512, then I'm happy to truncate as necessary.

If SHA-3, it is a sponge function internally so it is designed to do the 
"truncation" or rather "expansion" already and it'd be a shame not to 
use that feature directly.

(as an aside, I think we should go with Keccak entirely as it'll be out 
soon enough in NIST form as SHA-3, and it has substantial other benefits.)




iang

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email