Re: [openpgp] Can the OpenPGP vs. S/MIME situation be fixed?

Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz> Mon, 04 July 2016 03:41 UTC

Return-Path: <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
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 0250B12D091 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 20:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.626
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.626 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=auckland.ac.nz
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 9gaOKH-6H7z4 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 20:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.auckland.ac.nz (mx4.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.125.248]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D910C12B01B for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 20:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=@auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1467603683; x=1499139683; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=11FfhzarekBMTkklVo9milv1/exrA+sz26fSDi6bUqU=; b=oCTmExySm5KI6rtAZ3SDci3KNZCabJ20+iqyFQyca25wssbto6cbIvkL oY9n3+hslbIeKg3CNKAn82C7oTKYJ79gj/LgwdIsVtaq8SSUGruM2Q9CG NwKVx1QyrfuZvwTtBm1C7/TWX6Lg1TUmc2ldv2jEMtnAoqXKfQKmmrVRW f/wVhLDH/7C4CYptyIY3sde8Cao5m8gQ+usxov8WJYkdoe434DHXr4+Hb YBFwkDpDgTUeqoGRRxzqxRXTWX0PRUd8x772jh5/Vh++29r5qQOz2iQdY rnLe0EsRIhXp9JRD7tqWLDdeNOdy9QL0H14Bh+ppNY78A2QQBFAMf0EdN Q==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,572,1459771200"; d="scan'208";a="94819549"
X-Ironport-HAT: MAIL-SERVERS - $RELAYED
X-Ironport-Source: 130.216.4.106 - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from uxchange10-fe2.uoa.auckland.ac.nz ([130.216.4.106]) by mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 04 Jul 2016 15:41:18 +1200
Received: from UXCN10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz ([169.254.5.93]) by uxchange10-fe2.UoA.auckland.ac.nz ([130.216.4.106]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 15:41:18 +1200
From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hanno_B=F6ck?= <hanno@hboeck.de>, IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [openpgp] Can the OpenPGP vs. S/MIME situation be fixed?
Thread-Index: AQHR050jpR81NF3KlE2UhFa6MyYJKaAGlDWAgAEQVZg=
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 03:41:18 +0000
Message-ID: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4CB97D2@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
References: <20160701153304.332d2c95@pc1>, <874m86xq04.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
In-Reply-To: <874m86xq04.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.6.2.3]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/URq4yPFAU-o_h2TLsHeG_OSDmhk>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Can the OpenPGP vs. S/MIME situation be fixed?
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: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 03:41:28 -0000

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> writes:

>I think we should be clear about what it would take to do what you're
>proposing; there are two main angles:
>
>* certificate interoperability (OpenPGP certs vs. X.509 certs)

This is easily solved in a technical spec, just define (to use the approach
I've been using in my code, which as worked more or less seamlessy for some
years), the use of sKID for S/MIME and issuerAndSerialNumber for PGP.

>* message interoperability (PGP/MIME vs. S/MIME)

This can't be solved by a technical spec, it's an application issue which you
resolve by e.g. writing a PGP plugin for Outlook.

Peter.