IETF Logo Mail Archive

[openpgp] Guidance for Designated Expert?

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> Sun, 05 February 2023 17:26 UTC

Return-Path: <dkg@fifthhorseman.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 48E53C14EB14 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 09:26:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.303
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.303 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_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b="2z1/SpqV"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b="m0IH7rAz"
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 tOMjhbe-dLpm for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 09:26:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from che.mayfirst.org (unknown [162.247.75.117]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04E61C14EAA3 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 09:26:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019; t=1675618009; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=9oVuZKKBINRhVMpeABXyFpmu4HSCKwP9mg0RWyaT6Rk=; b=2z1/SpqV2HPKOqf+hYnxL2aZWhG7BX2nGpUbKppCsA6+f7wDpB8IJXzg35TGgd5eKW/3I 6EtN1WsRpePAwhiCw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019rsa; t=1675618009; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=9oVuZKKBINRhVMpeABXyFpmu4HSCKwP9mg0RWyaT6Rk=; b=m0IH7rAzBT3U2LduX46LXTAB1VtJVe4/GicaHdXQzCMmX8PDeHa8J/eD9tu/ysSlMe/YQ 44ugFyRSWlRXN0cTp8UDALKCB8z5aBRpCtrlvn9wgW2m8mnzLh7sFoyWj82RlpurEIu07+P PJswrPrrIOHl0KvxzpMtYObWHA6ksKiAdvbvKwvUIR4sUlDBfYrCw01kbNVt+fBnMrcq3TE AJO4LP+/p8WNlII/QBQ7r754QtR0CN9E7/ju9tkKvVH4IGgY1BfKY61jVQusYRV8cb1kON/ nCvh6BzZeo2YKe8KfvezEuja0SLVXY+pYDWQSemI91U8mB/ii4Xch5bJIZCA==
Received: from fifthhorseman.net (lair.fifthhorseman.net [108.58.6.98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2D2CF9AD for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 12:26:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6BD131FD73; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 12:26:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: openpgp@ietf.org
Autocrypt: addr=dkg@fifthhorseman.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEX+i03xYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACA4xvL/xI5dHedcnkfViyq84doe8zFRid9jW7CC9XBiI0QQf FgoAgwWCX+i03wWJBZ+mAAMLCQcJEOCS6zpcoQ26RxQAAAAAAB4AIHNhbHRAbm90YXRpb25zLnNl cXVvaWEtcGdwLm9yZ/tr8E9NA10HvcAVlSxnox6z62KXCInWjZaiBIlgX6O5AxUKCAKbAQIeARYh BMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AADZHQD/Zx9nc3N2kj13AUsKMr/7zekBtgfSIGB3hRCU74Su G44A/34Yp6IAkndewLxb1WdRSokycnaCVyrk0nb4imeAYyoPtBc8ZGtnQGZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4u bmV0PojRBBMWCgCDBYJf6LTfBYkFn6YAAwsJBwkQ4JLrOlyhDbpHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3Rh dGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3JnL0Gwxvypz2tu1IPG+yu1zPjkiZwpscsitwrVvzN3bbADFQoI ApsBAh4BFiEEwp+KDAHzXjTYFqpc4JLrOlyhDboAAPkXAP0Z29z7jW+YzLzPTQML4EQLMbkHOfU4 +s+ki81Czt0WqgD/SJ8RyrqDCtEP8+E4ZSR01ysKqh+MUAsTaJlzZjehiQ24MwRf6LTfFgkrBgEE AdpHDwEBB0DkKHOW2kmqfAK461+acQ49gc2Z6VoXMChRqobGP0ubb4kBiAQYFgoBOgWCX+i03wWJ BZ+mAAkQ4JLrOlyhDbpHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3RhdGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3Jnfvo+ nHoxDwaLaJD8XZuXiaqBNZtIGXIypF1udBBRoc0CmwICHgG+oAQZFgoAbwWCX+i03wkQPp1xc3He VlxHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3RhdGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3JnaheiqE7Pfi3Atb3GGTw+ jFcBGOaobgzEJrhEuFpXREEWIQQttUkcnfDcj0MoY88+nXFzcd5WXAAAvrsBAIJ5sBg8Udocv25N stN/zWOiYpnjjvOjVMLH4fV3pWE1AP9T6hzHz7hRnAA8d01vqoxOlQ3O6cb/kFYAjqx3oMXSBhYh BMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AADX7gD/b83VObe14xrNP8xcltRrBZF5OE1rQSPkMNy+eWpk eCwA/1hxiS8ZxL5/elNjXiWuHXEvUGnRoVj745Vl48sZPVYMuDgEX+i03xIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEH QIGex1WZbH6xhUBve5mblScGYU+Y8QJOomXH+rr5tMsMAwEICYjJBBgWCgB7BYJf6LTfBYkFn6YA CRDgkus6XKENukcUAAAAAAAeACBzYWx0QG5vdGF0aW9ucy5zZXF1b2lhLXBncC5vcmcEAx9vTD3b J0SXkhvcRcCr6uIDJwic3KFKxkH1m4QW0QKbDAIeARYhBMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AAAX mwD8CWmukxwskU82RZLMk5fm1wCgMB5z8dA50KLw3rgsCykBAKg1w/Y7XpBS3SlXEegIg1K1e6dR fRxL7Z37WZXoH8AH
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2023 12:26:46 -0500
Message-ID: <87v8kgm3ah.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/fMaaA9SWtbNwYrto9dROnfuVmO8>
Subject: [openpgp] Guidance for Designated Expert?
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, 05 Feb 2023 17:26:55 -0000

Hi OpenPGP folks--

We will have a number of "specification required" registries that need a
Designated Expert to decide whether a specification is sufficient.

Ben Kaduk pointed to some options here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/3w9bwStWx4NMjvMUiOkVgvNNJlI/
and this is being tracked at
https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis/-/issues/146

No one has offered an MR yet, but hopefully Stephen or i can make one
before the interim.

A baseline proposal (sorry it's not yet a patch), is for the guidance to
say that the Designated Experts should be given substantial leeway, but
they should:

- avoid codepoint squatting and vanity registrations

- require that the specification is concretely useful

- require that any registered algorithms meet the security requirements
  of the community and the message structures for which they are
  proposed to be used.

Any objections to this outline?  any other suggested guidance?

Please use this thread to discuss.

    --dkg

v2.36.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status