private key language
nagydani@epointsystem.org (Daniel A. Nagy) Wed, 28 December 2005 09:32 UTC
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ErXfe-0006nR-Te for openpgp-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 04:32:34 -0500
Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA13562 for <openpgp-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 04:31:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from above.proper.com (localhost.vpnc.org [127.0.0.1]) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id jBS97je3067609; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 01:07:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9/Submit) id jBS97juA067597; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 01:07:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Authentication-Warning: above.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from mail.epointsystem.org ([195.228.156.120]) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id jBS97fPA067481 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 01:07:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nagydani@epointsystem.org)
Received: by mail.epointsystem.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6639B2B47CC; Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:07:35 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:07:35 +0100
To: OpenPGP <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>
Subject: private key language
Message-ID: <20051228090735.GB6550@epointsystem.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
From: nagydani@epointsystem.org
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>
There's another issue I would like to see cleared up. Right now, I think the private key format is overspecified. This is especially important, since the format in the specification has known weaknesses. I think, it should be ultimately up to each implementation how they store private keys and it does not affect interoperability. It should be made clear that private key packets are intended only as an export-import format and that additional security measures (such as enclosing the whole thing inside an integrity-protected encrypted packet) are recommended, when transfering private keys. -- Daniel
- private key language Daniel A. Nagy
- Re: private key language David Shaw
- Re: private key language Daniel A. Nagy
- Re: private key language David Shaw
- Re: private key language Daniel A. Nagy
- Re: private key language David Shaw
- Re: private key language Jon Callas
- Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private key la… Daniel A. Nagy
- Re: Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private ke… Jon Callas
- Re: Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private ke… Daniel A. Nagy
- Re: Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private ke… Jon Callas
- Re: Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private ke… Daniel A. Nagy
- Re: Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private ke… Ben Laurie
- Re: Short intro on the K-R attack [Re: private ke… Ian G