Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test cases?
Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Fri, 13 December 2013 21:41 UTC
Return-Path: <wk@gnupg.org>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E483C1AE1B2 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:41:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
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 oEqBblkjhy7q for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:41:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [217.69.77.222]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CE41AE052 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:41:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian)) id 1VraTi-0000A6-4R for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:40:58 +0100
Received: from wk by vigenere.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.80 #3 (Debian)) id 1VraMr-0005LW-35; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:33:53 +0100
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: David Leon Gil <coruus@gmail.com>
References: <1386947394098.1ce462e@Nodemailer>
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
OpenPGP: id=1E42B367; url=finger:wk@g10code.com
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:33:53 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1386947394098.1ce462e@Nodemailer> (David Leon Gil's message of "Fri, 13 Dec 2013 07:09:54 -0800 (PST)")
Message-ID: <87eh5gmo5a.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test cases?
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 21:41:09 -0000
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:09, coruus@gmail.com said: > In any event, I thought that developers of OpenPGPv4-implementing > software might find these useful as test-cases for correct behavior in > the presence of 64-bit key id collisions. (It's not clear to me, for > example, that GnuPG's current behavior is correct, or its output > particularly useful when faced with such a collision.) Thanks, that is useful stuff for regression tests. Salam-Shalom, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
- [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test cas… David Leon Gil
- Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test… Nicholas Cole
- Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test… Werner Koch
- Re: [openpgp] OpenPGPv4 long keyid collision test… Adam Back