IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Fingerprints

Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse> Wed, 06 May 2015 07:34 UTC

Return-Path: <look@my.amazin.horse>
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 5F55F1A8763 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 May 2015 00:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 KhK6rDHYXPd8 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 May 2015 00:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.mugenguild.com (mugenguild.com [5.135.189.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C8451A875D for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 May 2015 00:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (p57B2DEA7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.178.222.167]) by mail.mugenguild.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 331F05FD07; Wed, 6 May 2015 09:31:58 +0200 (CEST)
References: <CAMm+LwhbB+-MnGRBCvprgAGOuu+5CJ2rgod7EBGOQR5UNVrspQ@mail.gmail.com> <87d232lkb6.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <sjmlhhmakxp.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <871tiupupe.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box> <1430869683.28399.109.camel@scientia.net> <CAMm+LwgE0eOD1JgLYUwA_4Gh+pm-vGGd9hPX9KoUqQ9=RHBygg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 09:16:22 +0200
In-reply-to: <CAMm+LwgE0eOD1JgLYUwA_4Gh+pm-vGGd9hPX9KoUqQ9=RHBygg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87y4l2noqd.fsf@littlepip.fritz.box>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/RNdmf42gQSPBIamcLinUtqNso2s>
Cc: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net>, IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Fingerprints
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 06 May 2015 07:34:43 -0000

On 6 May 2015, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> Hmm but if it can be easily done, is there anything that speaks
>> against?

There is such a thing as over-engineering, and increasing a fingerprint
bit length upwards of 160 bits "just because we can" seems to go in that
direction.  160 bits is all the hashes ever calculated by the entire
bitcoin network bitcoin network times all the hashes ever calculated by
the entire bitcoin network.

Someone said "length is important", I wanted to bring that point back
into discussion.  I would really prefer not to have every user of
FuturePGP read 25 rather than 20 characters to people just because we
thought "why not" on this list.  The last thing openpgp needs is
stronger technical security assertions at the cost of usability.

 - V

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email