Re: [openpgp] Fingerprints

["Neal H. Walfield" <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 25 Nov 2022 18:14:33 +0100,
Daniel Huigens wrote:
> On Friday, November 25th, 2022 at 17:02, Neal H. Walfield <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Second, we could just make the version number part of the fingerprint.
> > That is, the fingerprint could be defined as the concatenation of 6
> > (assuming we do s/v5/v6/) plus the 256-bit SHA2-256 hash.
> 
> I would be in favor of always specifying the key version and fingerprint
> together. The one worry I have about making it actually part of the
> fingerprint is that if people are doing manual fingerprint verification
> (which, I'm the first to say they shouldn't, but..) then the leading
> constant 6 may make it easier to make two fingerprints appear "similar".
> 
> We could simply state that v6 key fingerprints should be presented as
> 6:xxxx..., for example, to make it clearer what's going on. That way,
> we can maybe also roll it out for v4 fingerprints, and always show
> v:fingerprint without causing too much confusion, hopefully.

I understand the motivation, but I'd rather hide this information;
it's an implementation detail that users don't need to know about.

If we start showing users 4:xxx, they are going to be confused.
Moreover, old software won't understand what to do with it.

Neal