Re: [openpgp] Disadvantages of Salted Signatures

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Thu, 14 December 2023 07:21 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=071298eea2=wk@gnupg.org>
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 4FC02C14CE24 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 23:21:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gnupg.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8pwbnNgXnqad for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 23:21:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ellsberg.gnupg.com (ellsberg.gnupg.com [IPv6:2a01:4f8:151:7306::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 073CDC14CF0D for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 23:21:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnupg.org; s=20181017; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5jPmAD/vPEv3+1Aui5E3hFzCl0W3gBorLWNBWPdmisw=; b=fZlBYY+VIHY1pIUAXemfw80719 bbMbwFSZ6kj3QhovwphquxCwEDrPYEgHBOZOVx6l1//wfhJtIIJk/TgWxSzEEjmcMUWyULgjE6pMO BBJKTHtiLmN9omGOl+dmzjSh7guV/c3Mgksj0q0HL1hgCqo7v3ykRfH6ynYKp2+rc9AY=;
Received: from uucp by ellsberg.gnupg.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.94.2 (Devuan)) (envelope-from <wk@gnupg.org>) id 1rDg2L-00027l-Rn for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:21:37 +0100
Received: from wk by jacob.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.96 (Devuan)) (envelope-from <wk@gnupg.org>) id 1rDg1J-000226-0b; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:20:33 +0100
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: Nickolay Olshevsky <o.nickolay@gmail.com>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
References: <077dd27cef0c7d3968967fc4c3a880081b8bd9dd.camel@posteo.de> <87jzplrtfy.wl-neal@walfield.org> <87bd4895386b3a0cd0c62429b0b85df6f1860da2.camel@posteo.de> <db25c5b9-0d08-4b45-85c9-49b8277d80ec@gmail.com> <875y13sooh.wl-neal@walfield.org> <ba75b1b3-2b57-440e-ba6e-e9629bc9cf6b@gmail.com> <FF2CBF7A-8228-4483-9B43-B750ACBCE22F@riseup.net> <0cf9a740-d783-45c0-aa90-1d6868134021@gmail.com>
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
Jabber-ID: wk@jabber.gnupg.org
Mail-Followup-To: Nickolay Olshevsky <o.nickolay@gmail.com>, openpgp@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:20:32 +0100
In-Reply-To: <0cf9a740-d783-45c0-aa90-1d6868134021@gmail.com> (Nickolay Olshevsky's message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2023 14:36:22 +0200")
Message-ID: <87edfp8d33.fsf@jacob.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=Oscor_Trafficking_Barrio_Azteca_halcon_Mudslide_industrial=intellige"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/7XcOxL1QCckhaVgRLLC8vbmZRcs>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Disadvantages of Salted Signatures
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 14 Dec 2023 07:21:45 -0000

On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 14:36, Nickolay Olshevsky said:
> If subpacket is no-go (actually, don't get how that technically
> differs from adding separate signature field), another way to relax
> MUSTness of salted signatures is to allow zero-size salt.

Actually I tried to include this into LibrePGP to get some kind of
compatibility to the crypto-refresh and be prepared for a larger
subpacket area.  However, I had to give up because the other part of the
crypt-refresh is to drop the signing of the literal data packet's
metadata.


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner

-- 
The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that
refuse military service.             - A. Einstein