Re: [openpgp] Backwards compatibility vs streaming verification of v6 clearsigned messages

Hey Paul (and all),

The SaltedHash header wasn't a thing before, it was introduced by
the crypto refresh for v6. For v4, there's still the Hash header,
though it's made optional by Justus's MR (which I'm OK with).

And, I agree in general that the hash headers don't serve a very
strong purpose, and I'm happy to remove them :) 

Best,
Daniel

------- Original Message -------
On Saturday, May 27th, 2023 at 15:19, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:

> On May 27, 2023, at 02:53, Justus Winter justus@sequoia-pgp.org wrote:
> 
> > We talked about this at the OpenPGP email summit, and we agreed that
> > this is a good solution. I have created a merge request where we can
> > fine-tune the change:
> > 
> > https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis/-/merge_requests/313
> 
> 
> This PR seems to remove the definition of salted hash but as it is still allowed for v4, there should be a definition somewhere in the document I think ?
> 
> Paul (read this before coffee, on a phone, just by looking at the diff, so perhaps I’m wrong. Will double check myself later)
> _______________________________________________
> openpgp mailing list
> openpgp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp