Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test cases?

Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org> Fri, 13 December 2013 21:55 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@cypherspace.org>
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 685E01ADF6C for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:55:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] 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 4dcnvb3QZYoU for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:55:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD5D1AE3AB for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:55:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from netbook (184-94-60-58.dedicated.allstream.net [184.94.60.58]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus4) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MS65a-1VxkZQ18Q6-00Sp6o; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:54:58 -0500
Received: by netbook (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 239CC2E49D9; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:54:49 +0100 (CET)
Received: by flare (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1000); Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:54:43 +0100
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:54:42 +0100
From: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
To: David Leon Gil <coruus@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20131213215442.GA28709@netbook.cypherspace.org>
References: <1386947394098.1ce462e@Nodemailer> <87eh5gmo5a.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87eh5gmo5a.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Hashcash: 1:20:131213:coruus@gmail.com::jgbOSpJy5LOQUbbE:0KfSs
X-Hashcash: 1:20:131213:openpgp@ietf.org::XlhcwM/ojvw0Shgh:0E6Nm
X-Hashcash: 1:20:131213:adam@cypherspace.org::VF5J8Pljf0oAQV08:00000000000000000 0000000000000000000000003qF3
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:60eZNGbsPUeXzbCvV/1/qhw18aJaAMTSgZznBN8eDvb 7TfP3W/lqyJtvqENxlxd5fHGG7StVMpXBj0Hfye21GDUVC9s5h inJd5tDh8yQ0Lx2HW3xnyaMpc+q2B8Q2sThbTlk7qQx0d6FCbW ZXIqz3UK5CJvYimerZ9/LIBq2OKF7hmFbwsdiaB2eHfWDvROiW ZhMTtlhWM9Df+xQSmb582J1T0NOzwOMwfupwHA1g5R/MQUanOq CXW+A6i2rD5B2uwNms29KIgM2HIkHlJQCKcuJd9FHJFM7TvK9N 1uinqMDivqde5KkCR7SEtihL8G/Ix90zQ8ymuvfk6RhqOfT8+b ovFtoZBuogBIE/a/6yLSfNtBpN9SwoZ6dnf9D4is5
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org, Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test cases?
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: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 21:55:07 -0000

Out of interest, I presume you made it via a birthday collision?

Adam

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:33:53PM +0100, Werner Koch wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:09, coruus@gmail.com said:
>
>> In any event, I thought that developers of OpenPGPv4-implementing
>> software might find these useful as test-cases for correct behavior in
>> the presence of 64-bit key id collisions. (It's not clear to me, for
>> example, that GnuPG's current behavior is correct, or its output
>> particularly useful when faced with such a collision.)
>
>Thanks, that is useful stuff for regression tests.