Re: [openpgp] whitespace definitions in OpenPGP [was: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-01.txt]

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> Tue, 16 February 2021 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D083A0BDB for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 09:08:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b=U9KOC+z+; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b=j8OpAZ8+
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 LB5stTxZU6mV for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 09:08:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [IPv6:2001:470:1:116::7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01FAD3A0BFC for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 09:08:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019; t=1613495287; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=DKsa95x5A6ShlHZMzZfSwKZuQRojj4nHSFICobjlZ/M=; b=U9KOC+z+poDPpu+4hHH+Yow3jTO52l/JYbgvYn4TUSKztcE1IyHEmvqJroXO0jdwTmzaa TnexWtC5Vz4P6gRCg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019rsa; t=1613495287; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=DKsa95x5A6ShlHZMzZfSwKZuQRojj4nHSFICobjlZ/M=; b=j8OpAZ8+FuMhYlTmY8GPFbpNScQXrZSg/H/FiwraL9ANxsvwzrKHUJSwvz/HDY8U48l/l rzHoshG7TMoWcJuwu1OFOLyflG3O0MDaZdjeQeZka1PTCN6y3hrW02STYN6bN2k4PISR7xW JTrZzlOflzc2PJ4U5gSEyndj3QGWQKngvTGBLLeEg3EZCXb8d1+H8Pl8gdVm7CllAzL36cF j6+Z1cAbhqKKsnyF7gNzLkNys4AmNRs4BVyFJrubxq5Oqo6ZHdFMauETV09drb4mF4l1ai6 RrEy2KS/GmBO74cI9l00m2vVlBJjy39JJPcr/kZks2sG7N3E9rxk1WkCXyhw==
Received: from fifthhorseman.net (lair.fifthhorseman.net [108.58.6.98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D2AA2F9A6; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:08:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3943A2053E; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:08:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
Cc: Guillem Jover <guillem@hadrons.org>, Andrew Gallagher <andrewg@andrewg.com>, openpgp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <87h7mcl6mx.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
References: <161254580617.29620.7114088127291075805@ietfa.amsl.com> <76fe41fc-f14e-fe3c-db02-7e5b7629dc8a@gmx.net> <1612693541055.92697@cs.auckland.ac.nz> <fe95a37d-7853-fa7b-f8ce-49b60928206b@andrewg.com> <YCVSa3CWuRIV17ry@thunder.hadrons.org> <87blckvqa5.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <87h7mcl6mx.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
Autocrypt: addr=dkg@fifthhorseman.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEX+i03xYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACA4xvL/xI5dHedcnkfViyq84doe8zFRid9jW7CC9XBiI0QQf FgoAgwWCX+i03wWJBZ+mAAMLCQcJEOCS6zpcoQ26RxQAAAAAAB4AIHNhbHRAbm90YXRpb25zLnNl cXVvaWEtcGdwLm9yZ/tr8E9NA10HvcAVlSxnox6z62KXCInWjZaiBIlgX6O5AxUKCAKbAQIeARYh BMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AADZHQD/Zx9nc3N2kj13AUsKMr/7zekBtgfSIGB3hRCU74Su G44A/34Yp6IAkndewLxb1WdRSokycnaCVyrk0nb4imeAYyoPtBc8ZGtnQGZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4u bmV0PojRBBMWCgCDBYJf6LTfBYkFn6YAAwsJBwkQ4JLrOlyhDbpHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3Rh dGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3JnL0Gwxvypz2tu1IPG+yu1zPjkiZwpscsitwrVvzN3bbADFQoI ApsBAh4BFiEEwp+KDAHzXjTYFqpc4JLrOlyhDboAAPkXAP0Z29z7jW+YzLzPTQML4EQLMbkHOfU4 +s+ki81Czt0WqgD/SJ8RyrqDCtEP8+E4ZSR01ysKqh+MUAsTaJlzZjehiQ24MwRf6LTfFgkrBgEE AdpHDwEBB0DkKHOW2kmqfAK461+acQ49gc2Z6VoXMChRqobGP0ubb4kBiAQYFgoBOgWCX+i03wWJ BZ+mAAkQ4JLrOlyhDbpHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3RhdGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3Jnfvo+ nHoxDwaLaJD8XZuXiaqBNZtIGXIypF1udBBRoc0CmwICHgG+oAQZFgoAbwWCX+i03wkQPp1xc3He VlxHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3RhdGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3JnaheiqE7Pfi3Atb3GGTw+ jFcBGOaobgzEJrhEuFpXREEWIQQttUkcnfDcj0MoY88+nXFzcd5WXAAAvrsBAIJ5sBg8Udocv25N stN/zWOiYpnjjvOjVMLH4fV3pWE1AP9T6hzHz7hRnAA8d01vqoxOlQ3O6cb/kFYAjqx3oMXSBhYh BMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AADX7gD/b83VObe14xrNP8xcltRrBZF5OE1rQSPkMNy+eWpk eCwA/1hxiS8ZxL5/elNjXiWuHXEvUGnRoVj745Vl48sZPVYMuDgEX+i03xIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEH QIGex1WZbH6xhUBve5mblScGYU+Y8QJOomXH+rr5tMsMAwEICYjJBBgWCgB7BYJf6LTfBYkFn6YA CRDgkus6XKENukcUAAAAAAAeACBzYWx0QG5vdGF0aW9ucy5zZXF1b2lhLXBncC5vcmcEAx9vTD3b J0SXkhvcRcCr6uIDJwic3KFKxkH1m4QW0QKbDAIeARYhBMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AAAX mwD8CWmukxwskU82RZLMk5fm1wCgMB5z8dA50KLw3rgsCykBAKg1w/Y7XpBS3SlXEegIg1K1e6dR fRxL7Z37WZXoH8AH
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:08:01 -0500
Message-ID: <871rdguej2.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/7ItRYUHwiXU04Jbt7fXQ26Nr_dk>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] whitespace definitions in OpenPGP [was: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-01.txt]
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 17:08:15 -0000

On Tue 2021-02-16 10:11:02 +0100, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 18:56, Daniel Kahn Gillmor said:
>
>> It seems clear to me that the text about whitespace that was merged into
>> -01 doesn't have WG consensus at the moment -- iiuc, it may address the
>
> The problem with such minor changes is that they require extensive
> interop tests.  Back when we started with OpenPGP we had to tweak these
> things a lot until all 3 implementations were interoperable.

yep -- this is a great place to apply an interop test.

I note that there are some "linebreak normalization tests" at the tests
that use SOP:

   https://tests.sequoia-pgp.org/#Detached_signatures__Linebreak_normalization

this contains some un-colored rows where you can see incompatibility
between implementations, and where neither proposed text offers guidance
as to which should be preferred.

Anyone proposing a future textual change to try to improve the situation
should take a look at that list.  Proposals for additional cases to test
would also be useful.

> If we really want to make the definition more strict, lets do this after
> all chartered changes have been done.

I agree that solving this problem isn't higher urgency than the
chartered text, which is why i've proposed reverting to the text from
RFC 4880 and opened https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis/-/issues/11
to track it in our backlog.  (i've tagged it with the "unchartered"
label as a reminder)

          --dkg