Re: [openpgp] Move new Signatures and Keys from v5 to v6?

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> Mon, 06 February 2023 20:26 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 826C4C15256B for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:26:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, 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=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b="ZYhysioC"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b="RcxTBeH3"
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 lX_22POIjkas for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:26:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [IPv6:2001:470:1:116::7]) (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 BC536C152564 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:25:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019; t=1675715125; h=from : to : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=+u5NDUcYUgmEZ3Ix2sFognLYFWqDyaCYUbaBzjfajcE=; b=ZYhysioCbnoQ6IHkV2UC06HzXdBfgh59tmWzI1EMc8OTKfHBH9J0j8z60t4f/f4LcSA2b u8tQPEWHS6lgCAVAw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019rsa; t=1675715125; h=from : to : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=+u5NDUcYUgmEZ3Ix2sFognLYFWqDyaCYUbaBzjfajcE=; b=RcxTBeH38VuijCpSZBULjOwjjtiQMIwHWfOQ+6Ze83sS0D1sjbREKo1q15nwgcIQFIU0O vzg7jxzbgHUU1LSYiw8Dzg58LhIUPoo0Bk4MLFDGzht4Rcc224h8O2oq8SriU/dHsxTktCv iYohwLm82N5+0Sy7D2i8nbbJJm12i66QiuQKnGk/FvSopiYWZ1/1qFMCBUlNupszb2TQcAV /AdFEcxHHWQf7Op0ecqlUZ8+0c8Y2Oll++j0nUUPrbhZfOMrwNV5HbDu5fLpm2ipSO6bcnj Ac6xLjbKMctAk8UJSNr76lxK93kdZMq7Gp7LPgaSx4+el7czRkijU7q1xauw==
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 5B320F9AD; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 15:25:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EB7BF2040E; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 15:25:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Falko Strenzke <falko.strenzke@mtg.de>, openpgp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <cc94aced-1f42-3b7e-7359-b6ee25af48fc@mtg.de>
References: <877cwwnige.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <cc94aced-1f42-3b7e-7359-b6ee25af48fc@mtg.de>
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: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 15:25:21 -0500
Message-ID: <87sffimthq.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/gk_e3BW5jloxStsv50uPxPJiG9I>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Move new Signatures and Keys from v5 to v6?
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: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:26:07 -0000

On Mon 2023-02-06 10:18:04 +0100, Falko Strenzke wrote:
> Yes, it definitely should, in my opinion. This leaves it to any 
> implementation to support v5, v6 or both. The resulting situation will 
> be far from ideal, but better than the one arising when the code point 
> transition to v6 is not made.

I agree it's far from ideal :(

> One subtle additional point in this course: The packet tag 0x20, used by 
> GnuPG for AEAD packets, currently marked as "reserved" in the 
> crypto-refresh, should probably marked as "_permanently_ reserved".

I'm not sure what the difference is between "reserved" and
"_permanently_ reserved".  can you elaborate further on what conditions
should be put on this codepoint reservation?

               --dkg