IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Possible to define a common key format for LibrePGP and OpenPGP-IETF?

Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org> Fri, 15 December 2023 11:15 UTC

Return-Path: <justus@sequoia-pgp.org>
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 5CE4EC14F682 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 03:15:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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_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 (4096-bit key) header.d=sequoia-pgp.org
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 FeZqjbhW1iXM for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 03:14:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from harrington.uberspace.de (harrington.uberspace.de [185.26.156.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F339DC14F609 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 03:14:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 12719 invoked by uid 500); 15 Dec 2023 11:14:54 -0000
Authentication-Results: harrington.uberspace.de; auth=pass (plain)
Received: from unknown (HELO unkown) (::1) by harrington.uberspace.de (Haraka/3.0.1) with ESMTPSA; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 12:14:54 +0100
From: Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org>
To: Kai Engert <kaie@kuix.de>
Cc: "openpgp@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>, Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>, Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <fda84dd5-4279-46cd-9b6a-90f211222df3@kuix.de>
References: <fda84dd5-4279-46cd-9b6a-90f211222df3@kuix.de>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 12:14:52 +0100
Message-ID: <87v88zbtub.fsf@europ.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Rspamd-Bar: ----
X-Rspamd-Report: BAYES_HAM(-2.832278) SIGNED_PGP(-2) SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1) MIME_GOOD(-0.2)
X-Rspamd-Score: -4.032278
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sequoia-pgp.org; s=uberspace; h=from; bh=rDC5qiEm3GZHbiPnPryIj3FwjrnAwS4jQ2sZ+7q10V4=; b=N3xSGWrW5dBj8/fPIaNwresXCwl+H1jUOzoFAiQQr2kS/2T4sNZfDBmb7uBTy+ydatMU1K8X3t d90AYFTyotVskp4a9tV7bqclLgTiNk8TgKepbYvB/644Kt1HT62xryRCTw5qZXheOhO+WVu/TMT1 KA+wiAf/hyZ10/GG6sh4++/Ndgn64JbnkMBi3hbe7QyQqd9dhAPTnuFAQlqG7XDYnd3MJiGKG4p5 hSns9qxjhHJsazY5u+ompB4qT15xnT4DooBxYUoKKcEyv2jCM8XAKSxlWL56J9gRIEm6KCIV3+dF b2bAOzFDftB8zw6KAA2XVud+E0VnM5qJFfrSyPTYaCIyem3KhiPaO7V31RWtWpl0P1k3doUboATo WtEJGdXoTWBkT9quxISMctX/OhyAQsWsJzQg7thB1vfyEAWnq2ZHu0yClM/iIcNUl4U2HdPzqZ0a iH305FyLbWaMta7Uy55JhiyJnMRjpg18BfvxuZCqMSOShMrfeGjCD6XkyVxA6ME9wxzIIVUO5RDH kZfTAD+RtMwwsVs6udbTX88EhKf6ly5Y8IiSFIm15X+4Xrzofc4seNpIfUhNHQaBY9K7MngmYFh0 yb2y2fEr8fvt+vTlWzcoz+bwxihokeUR0EwA8QMsklgVSXDBV8aR9xE59mKATYLKW+SPD6vO4IFk M=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/rI3oIf1urC64hdyYvx9bl98Pd50>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Possible to define a common key format for LibrePGP and OpenPGP-IETF?
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: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 11:15:03 -0000

Hi Kai :)

Kai Engert <kaie@kuix.de> writes:

> Would it be possible to define a key format that satisfies the needs
> of both the crypto-refresh and LibrePGP specifications?

You are trying to find a compromise, which is a commendable goal.  And
indeed, standardization bodies like the IETF is where we come together
and find compromises.

And we did.  A lot of people, including representatives from GnuPG, RNP,
OpenPGP.js, GopenPGP, and Sequoia, met regularly, for over a year,
spending considerable time and energy on building a compromise.

That compromise is affectionately called
draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-12.

It represents the best compromise between what we wanted to do and what
we could do given various constraints, such as available time and
energy, the charter, our sometimes conflicting goals and views.

Best,
Justus

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email