IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Fingerprints

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Wed, 06 May 2015 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 5769A1B2F55 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 May 2015 14:07:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 z9zY4Zbbwoij for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 May 2015 14:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x22e.google.com (mail-la0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D5311B2F5F for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 May 2015 14:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by laat2 with SMTP id t2so16763188laa.1 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 06 May 2015 14:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+eKit5Q5RdnVuGa3+5N1mVHSEvydfylipa0OXASIvrc=; b=qK65qQwYpI2qNFmTcPB2lmCCCsAIVNNqujS2Gc+ozAoTYHUzFSH6n0AE9vk6bR09hY EmZzVWno0YQAM8OIl/cSCYUA513ADJ461BuDFFt6U7r5YJdMuZcyPtyTwXh3hBeKeKUj LjNb/vGyKH4rjThc9F9khBXMcZwvJbPyXvESqeajUbGP0dwdf7o6uw9E+FotI9NnkuVs qNJMEpJN9tnGJy4nyJ7qlIE+6dGpSwSPcij9+et1C2G2JYrXQA80iyX3qEASMm2yI4wX D2HmjeIcGTvSlcMn+LIu4A5A8974GAYeSmeyD2Fim7NMdOM/cjzpmesGgK+M0TUWKeif KlBw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.185.100 with SMTP id fb4mr474051lbc.79.1430946471697; Wed, 06 May 2015 14:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.203.163 with HTTP; Wed, 6 May 2015 14:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <87vbg5o2pz.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box>
References: <CAMm+LwhbB+-MnGRBCvprgAGOuu+5CJ2rgod7EBGOQR5UNVrspQ@mail.gmail.com> <87d232lkb6.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <sjmlhhmakxp.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <871tiupupe.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box> <1430869683.28399.109.camel@scientia.net> <CAMm+LwgE0eOD1JgLYUwA_4Gh+pm-vGGd9hPX9KoUqQ9=RHBygg@mail.gmail.com> <1430937492.28399.127.camel@scientia.net> <CAMm+Lwh2J6mMuDouc1PtBpfTU5Pcwj=+KNDehi6nwRabivoOrg@mail.gmail.com> <87vbg5o2pz.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 17:07:51 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8PrghXJHHWYhg--FsvXtTgYKE4o
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwjKMY7PFCXhq+zMZFzEgkBXWKam4f01MABcyG=d4CYHcg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/7LSSz2jx--tuFOqpbuzL_oOhttw>
Cc: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net>, IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>
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: Wed, 06 May 2015 21:07:54 -0000

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse> wrote:
>
> On 6 May 2015, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> In 'under the covers' applications the user does not need to see, I
>> would hope we would support use of the 256 bit or full 512 bit
>> fingerprint.
>
> Hm. Do you have a specific purpose for that in mind?

Any time someone is using a WF-256 bit key.

But also in the notary systems used for timestamping and such

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email