Re: [openpgp] To bind or not to bind

Aron Wussler <aron@wussler.it> Sat, 23 March 2024 22:19 UTC

Return-Path: <aron@wussler.it>
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 2B786C14F6A5 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wussler.it
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 cdoKXkPb_gW1 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-4018.proton.ch (mail-4018.proton.ch [185.70.40.18]) (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 B5A54C14F68E for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:18:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wussler.it; s=protonmail3; t=1711232337; x=1711491537; bh=ZA68n6iiIlXc2Svl5LpYSe2Q4xUW9qjjLIkXKT/9O5w=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=Le6XJIi896eY+6aV3yGkdayuO64ZjI4P1HYDn7u2Rbb4XtL52uEqNJEOCCh3Amy+0 +ARYG+rYiNp2e4rWs81xg9VuUrX/hLgn1zYYgt8qAPMnP0qUdqTIkrEvUw6y02ycPu W60/hweK7/NnGMZqXOC8nlc2u0qiZVO7Rk13OyinaU6NtD78qnB6fLveDnBsZuwvMI tUwNd+2HSI+hO2H3SonCXX52eFYkoNehGo7HKD0cHhItYOlqKNJC/lA8ANpHulmBKI DaXl5NswVVtZyHmnEFKO7re152DfsvxvsVcgQXDIbnrxsEVMY+fGPvM45d4Ctb1P4b 5AHnPD8yEfJGA==
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:18:48 +0000
To: Johannes Roth <johannes.roth@mtg.de>
From: Aron Wussler <aron@wussler.it>
Cc: "openpgp@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <lUnrJ6jC5HNt6_tEQHh_UzPeCOvINnNOtLeV3rHRw9waQO8QKUM3SejM2OrfAjpRptjGcQ8oQ82PPO177Rto9hQr8x-V7tUxr-ldEUjFic0=@wussler.it>
In-Reply-To: <abe50410-33b2-45ae-b728-87a6bff5751e@mtg.de>
References: <EGivTgyfjNm_TAvhds1OPA2c0O6LP9lFnkwWHHKLJY8ReJOgtDh3tnYsCSR8yrrBLbpeehtUgIJEhynae8L3daRimNiGO7BAb3cVvC66q-4=@wussler.it> <abe50410-33b2-45ae-b728-87a6bff5751e@mtg.de>
Feedback-ID: 10883271:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; boundary="------b2cb3717b72ab6b7d6e0390dd099c831b04a86bc4aa960598903be74239ae4e0"; charset="utf-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/naBrZnAOQpZtt_-8MNd1AeNTtNo>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] To bind or not to bind
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: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:19:06 -0000

Hello Johannes,

> > Note that (2) implies (1).
> 

> 

> I think you are mistaken here and (2) does not imply (1) since you can
> have a SEIPDv2-capable v4 key.

Indeed true. I have had bound in my head that this came with v6, SEIPDv2 preference is not version-based.
I still somehow think that logically speaking 2 implies 1, but not technically.

Cheers,
Aron