IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] To bind or not to bind

Aron Wussler <aron@wussler.it> Sun, 24 March 2024 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <aron@wussler.it>
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 5276AC14F6B8 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wussler.it
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pPs0QxTp7nr7 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-4317.proton.ch (mail-4317.proton.ch [185.70.43.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1157BC14F6B4 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:46:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wussler.it; s=protonmail3; t=1711266409; x=1711525609; bh=lUvVweIuSxj/WjpvRs2Qr3Nf1OuLGTFJnSSEijJ27+4=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=GfOfIX5FmRYjkZkqzlIwFvQKREkaZrJGD+Sg2hllRq82TfQrnvSK20X0P2lVaCni6 ErJUYBIhuNfGjPT25CsDFFov9r+8RuFecmGr3Di4UgsZ270xMqpo5dFL2Mr3eugd7/ cVR8WWBOPK700uM3cWMP1QygJ5zXnoRCuDsgoBzPcI0f0xmGD+skgD8VhJtcnAQNQn 8BPULGeJFaJpXAAxPT3IPMdmoSfKw82PztdJEzg3jdNjZjkrcVZK8NGTNmGaCxuFCO i8dAGFdq9S+VGn8dFVqZwG1hqQcj3Cf3CLCGDtfQEYfb6p2cKpMxakZJnpCffmqbA6 efAsBepqDK6VA==
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 07:46:43 +0000
To: Andrew Gallagher <andrewg@andrewg.com>
From: Aron Wussler <aron@wussler.it>
Cc: Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org>, "openpgp@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <bF-92wBkQpVTBtG4X-SGV-bs7DTsmSxKhQrOKm0Oz3vz8-LAnSGWswL-egGsOgvqwCjhTX5BLlWtE78Q9_j1M_1FoJ8UPyhaF2bvEAt67II=@wussler.it>
In-Reply-To: <3B6CA8FF-6206-4F7F-91E2-BB5E3406FDD1@andrewg.com>
References: <WKKpi2FW6r9Pftm6kgrVNtXvOXa2U9kz9R0wqlGYuPDl9nRkrcvVM3a2cfviolf1XN83lhPh2KxfzXb2A6d8HeQ4qdKYNd8LlqbtC1cRgCM=@wussler.it> <3B6CA8FF-6206-4F7F-91E2-BB5E3406FDD1@andrewg.com>
Feedback-ID: 10883271:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; boundary="------95408354f0faf8b4fd05d9d476d6704cc81d0ed9affa1825b83c1edfa47e07e4"; charset="utf-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/e21XzHh2-1MN2bdZR_pExroOiWk>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] To bind or not to bind
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 24 Mar 2024 07:46:58 -0000

Yep, I meant allowing, see subsequent correction.


Cheers,
Aron


-- 
Aron Wussler 
Sent with ProtonMail, OpenPGP key 0x7E6761563EFE3930



-------- Original Message --------
On 3/24/24 00:01, Andrew Gallagher <andrewg@andrewg.com> wrote:

>  Hi, Aron.
>  
>  On 23 Mar 2024, at 22:24, Aron Wussler <aron@wussler.it> wrote:
>  >
>  > I somehow still think that forbidding V4 PQC encryption does push toward V6
>  
>  I don’t understand this argument. Did you mean to say that *allowing* v4 pqc-e still pushes towards v6 (because that’s how you get sigs)?
>  
>  A

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email