Re: ASN.1 OID for TIGER/192 Mon, 30 September 2002 08:42 UTC

Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA26702 for <>; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 04:42:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g8U8NU224833 for ietf-openpgp-bks; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 01:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.6/8.11.3) with SMTP id g8U8NRv24820 for <>; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 01:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unverified []) by (SMTPRCV 0.45) with SMTP id <>; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:17:49 0200
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:17:49 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,lv,ru
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: ASN.1 OID for TIGER/192
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>
List-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hash: RIPEMD160

Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 08:55:50AM -0400, David Shaw wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > In 2440 and in all the 2440bis drafts, the TIGER/192 hash is not fully
> > usable as it has no OID.  Werner Koch and I, with the cooperation of
> > TIGER's authors, recently arranged an OID for it:

finally :)

> >
> >

so the full ASN string is:
  0x30, 0x29, 0x30, 0x0D, 0x06, 0x09, 0x2B, 0x06, 0x01, 0x04,
  0x01, 0xDA, 0x47, 0x0C, 0x02, 0x05, 0x00, 0x04, 0x18

I'm going to change PGP 2.6.3ia-multi06 to support this.

> > It would be good to put this in 2440bis so TIGER will be usable.
> I agree. All we have left now is to get one for HAVAL-5-160.

so do I (, and HAVAL-5-256...)

> > I have a sneaking suspicion that this may raise the question whether
> > TIGER should be in the standard at all, as so long as it did not have
> > an OID, the question was moot.  I have no strong feelings on this
> > point, but if we are not going to allow the use of TIGER, then perhaps
> > we should remove it from the standard altogether or explicitly
> > disallow its use as the current halfway state is confusing now that
> > there is an OID available.
> I think that we should keep it in, although my opinion may be unpopular.
> Few implementations allow the use of TIGER, and so those people who wish
> to use it can use one of those implementations. It is useful for (gasp!)
> Elgamal signatures,

and RSA signatures!

> because it provides a larger hash algorithm and
> therefore the hash algorithm is no longer the weakest link.

 ^----PGP 2.6.3ia-multi06 (supports IDEA, CAST5, BLOWFISH, TWOFISH,
      AES, 3DES ciphers and MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160, SHA2 hashes)
Version: Netscape PGP half-Plugin 0.15 by Disastry / PGPsdk v1.7.1