IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Fingerprint requirements for OpenPGP

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Wed, 13 April 2016 16:05 UTC

Return-Path: <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 1D2B412D5B6 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 zTBDNe2ExeKd for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [IPv6:2001:aa8:fff1:100::22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A46DF12B01D for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian)) id 1aqNIF-0004iJ-4q for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:05:27 +0200
Received: from wk by wheatstone.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.84 #3 (Debian)) id 1aqNF3-0007NP-5k; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:02:09 +0200
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
References: <87vb3nslqh.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <87potug3s5.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <sjmfuup1t02.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
OpenPGP: url=https://k.gnupg.net/80615870F5BAD690333686D0F2AD85AC1E42B367
Mail-Followup-To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:02:09 +0200
In-Reply-To: <sjmfuup1t02.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> (Derek Atkins's message of "Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:30:05 -0400")
Message-ID: <87vb3la45a.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/IBu5oxY6m6JnsMDNFWkJrh5YfgE>
Cc: IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Fingerprint requirements for OpenPGP
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 13 Apr 2016 16:05:30 -0000

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:30, derek@ihtfp.com said:

> I still believe we should use b, with the knowledge that the hard
> expiration is optional (could be 0).  This would protect against an
> attack where you lose control of your secret material and the attacker
> creates a new self-sig with a new expiration time.

Although I do not see a real need for this, I would accept this.


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email