IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] saltpack on OpenPGP message format problems

ianG <iang@iang.org> Sun, 21 February 2016 17:03 UTC

Return-Path: <iang@iang.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 59D121A8837 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:03:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-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 ooQwHCU4EKd3 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:03:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from virulha.pair.com (virulha.pair.com [209.68.5.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AAA81A8830 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:03:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tormenta.local (iang.org [209.197.106.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by virulha.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD8CA6D728; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 12:03:33 -0500 (EST)
To: openpgp@ietf.org
References: <56BB0308.8020504@iang.org> <20160210160641.GA3090@singpolyma-liberty> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4BED18C@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <87lh6rbp5n.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4BEE527@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <sjm60xt3lko.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
From: ianG <iang@iang.org>
Message-ID: <56C9EDE4.2020009@iang.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 17:03:32 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <sjm60xt3lko.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/d9LMIMUypFwzWeFzWcNIlmy_ivM>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] saltpack on OpenPGP message format problems
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: <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, 21 Feb 2016 17:03:37 -0000

On 12/02/2016 17:06 pm, Derek Atkins wrote:
>   As others have mentioned, there are
> definitely reasons to keep *an* ascii armor format, especially for
> key/certificate transit (ala an x509 csr/crt submission/retrieval).

An additional use is the signature in cleartext signed documents, and 
incorporating the keys into cleartext signed documents so that they 
carry the documents can carry own PKI.



iang



ps; personal bias - above pattern is what I do, and/or was a key 
requirement for my work - but I'm not arguing to keep it for personal 
reasons as I moved away from using OpenPGP for this purpose some time ago.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email