Re: [openpgp] [RFC4880bis PATCH] Drop "Compatibility Profiles" section.

Ángel <angel@16bits.net> Sun, 02 May 2021 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <angel@16bits.net>
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 304FD3A091C for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 May 2021 14:07:21 -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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 OQKxMf2kuMWn for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 May 2021 14:07:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.direccionemail.com (mail.direccionemail.com [199.195.249.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFDFF3A091B for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 May 2021 14:07:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <ac0b040d1feca39a7f820dd6f1a242ae16f6abc0.camel@16bits.net>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1ngel?= <angel@16bits.net>
To: openpgp@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 02 May 2021 23:07:13 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87eeetaxsj.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
References: <87wnu86mep.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <20210324021213.333485-1-dkg@fifthhorseman.net> <87pmzp2taf.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <26945b02701cdbcf7af0ebd3adaa325b91021be7.camel@16bits.net> <87blb72yto.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <029c60b6a313d33cf5cc7e15791be8c0c582370c.camel@16bits.net> <ba29e6e3-7fe8-4ed6-819c-b0d0a22ec24@nohats.ca> <b4c6cb0b929dff027b28df546e4d90560dbba94f.camel@16bits.net> <dba9a771-a2b5-640-a9ba-7883b174ddd4@nohats.ca> <87eeetaxsj.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/VfFD9Twth9Je2kiOQZy3A1i5vHg>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] [RFC4880bis PATCH] Drop "Compatibility Profiles" section.
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 02 May 2021 21:07:21 -0000

On 2021-04-29 at 11:57 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > I've merged in this change in a seperate commit, please review as
> > part
> > of the next draft update. (commit 464ac8232f9)
> 
> I think the commit you're talking about is now public as
> 1edfd5d45a49a5a15d08eff9fff7d5c482acb6da, 'update text on "Simple S2K
> and Salted S2K specifiers" as per WG discussion'.
> 
> minor clarification: among a few other changes, it adds this line:
> 
> +Implementations SHOULD NOT use these methods on encryption of both
> keys and messages.
> 
> 
> I think this "both" should be "either" -- otherwise, the guidance
> sounds
> like it applies only to some combination encryption (which isn't
> possible iirc).  otherwise, it looks good to me.
> 
>          --dkg

Yep, it's clearly that one. It's basically my 
https://gitlab.com/Angel-Gonzalez/rfc4880bis/-/commit/43946c9a300ebac26d78838ab80893685349289f
with the "SHOULD avoid" changed into "SHOULD NOT", as discussed. Paul
probably ended up in a catch-22. The "both" was originally present as
"SHOULD avoid (...) on encryption of both keys and messages". I agree
with doing the s/both/either/ in the new text.


Best regards