[openpgp] "OpenPGP Simple"

Stephen Paul Weber <singpolyma@singpolyma.net> Sun, 15 March 2015 17:57 UTC

Return-Path: <singpolyma@singpolyma.net>
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 B3A401A1B5E for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 10:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.512
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 06kLItsWvvdf for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 10:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from singpolyma.net (singpolyma.net [184.107.182.218]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 800431A1B27 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 10:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by singpolyma.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AFA4DF2126; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 17:57:40 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:57:44 -0500
From: Stephen Paul Weber <singpolyma@singpolyma.net>
To: openpgp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20150315175744.GG2978@singpolyma-liberty>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9amGYk9869ThD9tj"
Content-Disposition: inline
Jabber-ID: singpolyma@singpolyma.net
OpenPGP: id=CE519CDE; url=https://singpolyma.net/public.asc
X-URL: https://singpolyma.net
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/SLtBsL7YA93BYFHlkmmgPdBi2uU>
Subject: [openpgp] "OpenPGP Simple"
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: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 17:57:42 -0000

One of the big obstacles to OpenPGP deployments that I've faced over time is 
the perception that it's "too complicated", mostly based on the sheer size 
of the current RFC.  There are two things going on here:

1) Sections of the RFC define what you might call "extras", such as the 
ASCII Armor (including a checksum unused elsewhere in the spec)
2) There are a lot of backwards-compatibility things (old-style lengths, 
lots of different algorithms)

One of the things I've tried to work on to help in some of my use cases is 
a modular description for a subset of OpenPGP that is (hopefully) easier to 
immediately grok and/or implement.  It is at 
<https://github.com/singpolyma/openpgp-spec>

Is there any prior art on IETF specs having a "full" and "simple" form where 
full implementations can read any output of simple ones, but not always 
vice-versa?  Given the (necessary) size of OpenPGP as a whole, it seems like 
this might be worth considering.

-- 
Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma
See <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted
edition right joseph