Re: [openpgp] Expected client behaviour ambiguity in signature verification

[Daniel Huigens <[e-mail]>]

On Friday, July 8th, 2022 at 13:03, Justus Winter wrote:

> Sequoia uses the digest prefix as when canonicalizing certificates. If
> we encounter a third party certification for which we don't have the
> issuers certificate, we use the digest prefix as a heuristic to check if
> a signature is associated with the right component, and if not, use it
> to find the right component (with a chance of 2^16 of getting it wrong,
> in which case we duplicate the signature).

I would prefer not to (have to) do such heuristics. Signatures should be
after the component they're associated with, and if they're not, just
ignore them, imo. Being lenient about signature placement in this way
can (eventually) force other implementations to do the same, similarly
to what apparently happened with not checking the hash prefix bytes.

Best,
Daniel