IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] To bind or not to bind

Andrew Gallagher <andrewg@andrewg.com> Wed, 27 March 2024 11:22 UTC

Return-Path: <andrewg@andrewg.com>
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 9ADAAC14F614 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:22:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=andrewg.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i7EERFIwjWFz for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fum.andrewg.com (fum.andrewg.com [135.181.198.78]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AC53C14F609 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=andrewg.com; s=andrewg-com; t=1711538533; bh=FvPyNs8q6D1/IGe5B6JeIMBZ7xqfYODwMo11Ik05Npo=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:From; b=Yo9K4YRvdLfX5K867ZjFjIG/9Oeh9Udf8ZExN0DrqeNPUXpR7WC+VMtqBBwDJvNTg Hz0QE2TXJy7th7cK23W7FBEpTcnSUJP9lmyECKoOb3qGlmQzwnOpnTR+Bt3shg+nHW fMnaQD2OOUi6ZG6JVjVFxskF9BjllgoHYQGXRiatW+gQ61RrPgmgxOENcQGX0SGLz0 98zHkLiDZWirlsZ1lLSH0KE7CQVBtbMBNLneL+qz6W14g6fAlEnaVWlBeH8MpijoLd 6abDjnTnT1wubcw3uIneUdnh79PTj0S1nxUiMYxj9YdQQ4ofRNaie/E2puyGxtY8C6 /QadF8dUlWARg==
Received: from smtpclient.apple (serenity [IPv6:fc93:5820:7349:eda2:99a7::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by fum.andrewg.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F3215DC44; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:22:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: Andrew Gallagher <andrewg@andrewg.com>
Message-Id: <8169558D-E770-495C-89BB-93F9BD42035A@andrewg.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_255C1312-4505-48B2-8472-EAB61814156D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6.1.1\))
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:21:55 +0000
In-Reply-To: <87v858gcmv.fsf@europ.lan>
Cc: Falko Strenzke <falko.strenzke@mtg.de>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, Aron Wussler <aron@wussler.it>, openpgp@ietf.org
To: Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org>
References: <87a5mqi0xi.fsf@europ.lan> <23B46D65-EAF7-43D0-A5F1-04D28B698559@andrewg.com> <87sf0h32d3.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <cd9a18d9-2d13-48d2-98e0-2ae268f68215@mtg.de> <87y1a6has4.fsf@europ.lan> <14a80b96-9860-461d-b9fe-e38e3bf651b1@mtg.de> <87v858gcmv.fsf@europ.lan>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/O5Ch65rW3z2gPye5VsM_LFZAShs>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] To bind or not to bind
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 27 Mar 2024 11:22:38 -0000

On 27 Mar 2024, at 11:03, Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org> wrote:
> 
> I could also add a PQC encryption subkey to my *existing* v4 key.
> In this case, I think it is not unreasonable to expect it to continue to
> work with PGPy (or GopenPGPv2), but it does not.

I think this is a valid concern, however the impact is highly dependent on how many deployed clients rely on these libs. If Proton and Thunderbird were able to migrate themselves within a reasonable timeframe, what would be left outstanding? Are we getting worked up over something that has a relatively straightforward fix?

A

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email