IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Replacing the OpenPGP Encryption Mode is Harmful and Pointless

Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com> Tue, 19 July 2022 09:01 UTC

Return-Path: <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
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 DE691C16ECF7 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 02:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.421
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.421 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1.685] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
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 w2vRtmNymR0i for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 02:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-4322.protonmail.ch (mail-4322.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.22]) (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 632B5C14F725 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 02:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 09:00:54 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1658221265; x=1658480465; bh=6GrAnIjv1aRVt75GfWu7yhVmQN8AQkBpSNdLqTSEOP4=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To: Feedback-ID:Message-ID; b=l2LwaUMBqxbHZJghOAg0AebdBNPpPNADPsvvi+Xw2CT8gyFgppqTeOF1bD1TzLrYZ WHTND+4FrpM4Gog/oNw+NU5k3/hS9pXF4ixpg5pb1BISySAeibI37V6JU8nClSD0Zp o5Lzp0dVlufs2CUh5IEb+cw94aB0yLBKhaX2kxeN3pYkiTewCw1GZLN2ArBjkV36ey zLmrlESdrutpxJ2LbT1Z6jCWQM3GWNhe/BjxP2NVf4sgx8bc8DdiDw5pIhws4gSJf/ gQuRbGmVuxwnEmIXpDi0qe7Vz7a1BP0Kw7jmg3HjWzjJ0hZx6efYiJ3OoL7oU7auvf /BwCGEd9yvJGA==
To: Bruce Walzer <bwalzer@59.ca>
From: Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Reply-To: Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <mO5WvXZVzUVtXsjaZL440ePU6Lztcmd_GV1YFxVWBahpz7ZnnaleNuwXsfbdKMQ0fOpzX8PbwSGjU5NQpXJJz4hMYK_Hkw2oNyFTq-xd-eE=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <YtXUbGzZ2H3Rn9mF@ohm.59.ca>
References: <YtFLcfKMEC/vRXY+@watt.59.ca> <8z4hYvgxLiNrfVMLCTfxUFCm6MVzugdNOvjPdvn4qoRF76lESafW0nqnQthrtCGbGK3ire9lqAmrJetJHHCYJiHhxXXgkCWKB5zmPc6Ax-g=@protonmail.com> <YtG/rE5D71hJtFyM@ohm.59.ca> <bZNA5Kqg_5MZFIzOuRnGvoTx8_tPdvasQ8U7v1tCQQXfVJu5QZOqpoq1TTqeXi_TMjHzDFEKtfIV--pC7vIO0t0nswB2vv1AqqSrfY_c8CY=@protonmail.com> <YtXUbGzZ2H3Rn9mF@ohm.59.ca>
Feedback-ID: 2934448:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/e7BICGWCoGpLUItHFTcgJkiI1PU>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Replacing the OpenPGP Encryption Mode is Harmful and Pointless
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: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 09:01:13 -0000

On Monday, July 18th, 2022 at 23:45, Bruce Walzer wrote:

> I am not sure why it would be required to go over the data twice for
> OCFB-MDC. Since it is streamable, I don't know how that would even be
> possible.

Of course both can be done simultaneously, but OCFB-MDC has to compute
two functions on the data: the block cipher and SHA1. OCB, by contrast,
is an integrated scheme; it only calls the block cipher. It is thus
almost as efficient as only encrypting the data, but also provides
integrity, almost for free. See [1] for more information.

Best,
Daniel

[1]: https://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/ocb/ocb-faq.htm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email