IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] New S2K specifiers?

Jon Callas <joncallas@icloud.com> Tue, 02 April 2019 03:34 UTC

Return-Path: <joncallas@icloud.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 EBE631200F6 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 20:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.85, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=icloud.com
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 PTQg_O-FvqYM for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 20:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mr85p00im-ztdg06021801.me.com (mr85p00im-ztdg06021801.me.com [17.58.23.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC61C1200D7 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 20:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=icloud.com; s=04042017; t=1554176085; bh=JWKEnucjYmJVr42kBy0h9u5iVetIVVJ3hfCt4F23tNQ=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date:Message-Id:To; b=d1vnl7voF19Rpa3XcRwH+3znIuhtBZPD5HKRcrtWou1lmN6CWeb6KdXA6ZsRUWkt8 GrSgu2YSt4LTy2aV2ooiRnFkxDaiwjM3FrzJt5CZbCiogJLgj21ta27UYO8yvzyNOI 53Sl1HyXIIRBPBerTzkoS2bGkMBGT9vEPIv1oxW81mrMkVTN2qccm492PYJ/ldsFDP 2O7057VEoB3pQm5w3zFu6Q8mQ2B7B/rAz2SBmuPDiV28Fq3B1mB8fx8ekxwcBzwY9Y Qxq2qhEkZakBpbalJca4vTJUougFX45+RHFjk1HV/MzeSZ1JUCyBh11OXdOeQpALI3 aCZtZACeQYi6A==
Received: from [192.168.7.69] (thing1.merrymeet.com [173.164.244.99]) by mr85p00im-ztdg06021801.me.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCD93180149; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 03:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: Jon Callas <joncallas@icloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190402014643.96606406B6@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 20:34:44 -0700
Cc: Jon Callas <joncallas@icloud.com>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, openpgp <openpgp@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <05B2C0AA-E6EF-4C6A-BE17-A2814AFBF2C5@icloud.com>
References: <20190331121024.cgta3emx6vefex6x@aurora.local.incenp.org> <87k1gebu9o.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <20190402014643.96606406B6@smtp.hushmail.com>
To: vedaal@nym.hush.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-04-02_01:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=1 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=524 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1812120000 definitions=main-1904020024
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/eEbKhThEEgrXVvtpK2X5Rw8TrJs>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] New S2K specifiers?
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: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 03:34:48 -0000

> On Apr 1, 2019, at 6:46 PM, vedaal@nym.hush.com wrote:
> 
> Will the new S2K be only for the V5 key format?
> Or will it also be used for Conventionally Encrypted messages?

It would be for any key, or for conventionally encrypted messages.

> 
> If it will be used for Conventionally Encrypted messages too, then there can be backward incompatibility issues, 
> as well as intercompatibility issues with different implementations.
> 
> (I still think it's a good idea, but may be a really lot of extra work, so maybe only for V5 keys now).

Remember, definition is not implementation. You’re right that from an implementation standpoint, it might be best to make messages default to the old S2K for a while, but do it for V4 and V5 keys as well.

	Jon

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email