IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: How to Calculate Signatures?

Ian G <iang@systemics.com> Sun, 03 April 2005 21:37 UTC

Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28507 for <openpgp-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 17:37:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from above.proper.com (localhost.vpnc.org [127.0.0.1]) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j33LP4hB061573; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:25:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9/Submit) id j33LP45S061572; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:25:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: above.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from www.enhyper.com (mailgate.enhyper.com [62.49.250.18]) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j33LP3Y1061566 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:25:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from iang@systemics.com)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www.enhyper.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id j33LOeU03545; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:24:50 +0100
X-Authentication-Warning: www.enhyper.com: localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
Message-ID: <42505FF3.7030409@systemics.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:28:19 +0100
From: Ian G <iang@systemics.com>
Organization: http://financialcryptography.com/
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050219)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>
CC: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
Subject: Re: How to Calculate Signatures?
References: <20050403193929.0812057EBA@finney.org> <42505164.7040807@algroup.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <42505164.7040807@algroup.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ben Laurie wrote:
> 
> Hal Finney wrote:
> 
>> On this basis, if we did want to support the larger SHA hashes, we should
>> truncate them and keep the left 160 bits for use with existing DSA keys.
> 
> 
> Yes, please.


I'm curious on this point.  Other than the fact that
"it's broken" why is it that you see it important to
repair the DSA in OpenPGP?

iang

PS: As a point of notation for the RFC, isn't it DSS?
Or are we saying that DSA is implemented because it
is not quite DSS?
-- 
News and views on what matters in finance+crypto:
         http://financialcryptography.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email