IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] saltpack on OpenPGP message format problems

Stephen Paul Weber <singpolyma@singpolyma.net> Wed, 10 February 2016 16:06 UTC

Return-Path: <singpolyma@singpolyma.net>
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 993851B2C4D for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:06:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Vd_BVkBKda0y for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:06:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from singpolyma.net (singpolyma.net [184.107.182.218]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED14D1B2C24 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:06:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by singpolyma.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 21C6326C0007; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:06:46 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=singpolyma.net; s=iweb; t=1455120406; bh=jkaVUGIVipyQZ9y7SfLehwG65A84zXsJYr+F2bATcA4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:In-Reply-To; b=j/iBSVNFXrn7GIfY2tEZm20n/x0dWZUUnYQi8bgWAeJLC31OkWAYb4zn8zOIMAVKa AskVPgX0ZOYDoXB3fyagbFwuBgvyaA7PrIFkSayjTvAAd8lOUlz/HUsnWjVR7KHUlb S+O2jOPO4Pg7rmT/h+ub1zTVKMP0A6puBsguqK7o=
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:06:41 -0500
From: Stephen Paul Weber <singpolyma@singpolyma.net>
To: ianG <iang@iang.org>
Message-ID: <20160210160641.GA3090@singpolyma-liberty>
References: <56BB0308.8020504@iang.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56BB0308.8020504@iang.org>
Jabber-ID: singpolyma@singpolyma.net
OpenPGP: id=CE519CDE; url=https://singpolyma.net/public.asc
X-URL: https://singpolyma.net
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/DtqcAbM49hvUWCqL-4OpHY_nTgQ>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [openpgp] saltpack on OpenPGP message format problems
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: <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: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:06:50 -0000

>       4. PGP ASCII armor isn't friendly to modern apps and phones.

Couldn't we just say "PGP is binary, encode however you like"?  In email we 
have transport encodings, and so do most other reasonable places.  The only 
real use for ASCII armor anymore is in "clearsign" context when posting 
a plain text file that contains the signature, etc.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email