IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Shared OpenPGP keys for use in test corpuses

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Fri, 18 October 2019 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 24F21120890 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 06:00:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.473
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.473 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.172, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 4QRnlk_GmCCc for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 06:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-f42.google.com (mail-ot1-f42.google.com [209.85.210.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6387A12083E for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 06:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-f42.google.com with SMTP id z6so4885069otb.2 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 06:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=K9TWo7cJX9ye1QDu1lcpLSVNBxQ37u10TESqh9T0TR8=; b=IwWVYQxbDP7IWzOQ6oilf9uls3nhWU8nwLzjcTTvEG8btnpXi2ir6FMyGRb0n+dw1y SdVhRhBClL7UVspXl5+yosf4Jw24eIH9SzwajimtSd1d5pqng1m7KhGn8FoKmGxWDSXk hbm2KnF1QQiMFq6Uchheq7SkLJ/Ychr59G8OcqGs226ys3jepyy64ktn2YKEiYYwgSL0 EHlmFD3IhR4lORXt2DaZckH8Xrs4hYeT5NoCJsBe3Ct+mig56w4wI+t3c2QdH5UoIj1r ZhMh2DirVLOUPjh0NBJQGFwrNCbS6I1PjskheJEkbEEivg4elq9e5Y8DpjscrmvzrrTk zM5A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXn13R5EFQCz23QIMbVgfiZHoDq1x1iyNvYTOQUsIt/SgEjGApS b+gGiQpzqdw3s2lv85VAcmSsCMaYlCvwm3EnboQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqypMiN/zUPc8ZC7cSI4rjBs6bHpoUwjz6fXwubAZlgiP602gdUjedHgPmg3QRFN98RE0UlyKRNPW7K+EHWzlKo=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3a3:: with SMTP id f32mr7973734otf.231.1571403653504; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 06:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMm+LwiPuVKKP4geKvzPfwayt9ywbS_s5zFChU=cYg7qZ5hBhA@mail.gmail.com> <E6tMQg75su4YqMrAjArkCtN89pHFHaw9EAF94ULX2385@mailpile>
In-Reply-To: <E6tMQg75su4YqMrAjArkCtN89pHFHaw9EAF94ULX2385@mailpile>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 09:00:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwhscJv=eG8ta+9MQqeSyQy3JN6LCNcg8WoatRyJu-spng@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bjarni Runar Einarsson <bre@mailpile.is>
Cc: IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000090e5d805952eeca0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/o1luPAI-fkE-sXVpKJgfE2dGvq4>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Shared OpenPGP keys for use in test corpuses
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 13:00:56 -0000

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 3:51 AM Bjarni Runar Einarsson <bre@mailpile.is>
wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Hello!
>
> Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
> > If the generate key from specified seed work goes ahead, we get
> > this for free.
> >
> > It is one of the things that made me propose this idea back in
> > September :-)
>
> You're working with a very flawed definition of the concept
> "free". Sure, if all implementations everywhere add the same
> fancy feature, we can use that feature for "free" from that point
> in time onwards. Well, free aside from maintenance and bugfix
> costs... But getting there is expensive and I don't actually see
> consensus that we're moving in that direction. I'm not a fan, but
> I'll refrain from derailing this thread to pontificate on why.
>

Saying that you have technical objections which you will not reveal is
incredibly rude. Either state your objections so they can be responded to
or don't state them at all.

I proposed this idea September 28. I expect writing the draft and shipping
code to take no more than a day. So I don't see a problem with
implementation complexity. Nor do I see a need for this to be widely
implemented to address an issue that only affects developers.

The issue of test data for specifications is something that we should
probably address using a mechanism other than the ID series. Documents
should have illustrative examples. Test vectors are really something else.
Its like the supporting data now required for certain types of academic
paper.

The model I think we need here is to have an interop event in which
implementations demonstrate that they can generate and consume a particular
corpus. And then publish a report on that interop event with the names of
the tested implementations and the results.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email