[openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Signed Message"

Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com> Mon, 03 March 2025 10:43 UTC

Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 10:43:42 +0000
To: Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org>
From: Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <euodfAz9Ixsk9-TgcVJf0uTIC9txOTgvznS9ADAh3UsulwBcv04x_i-TkTbdwRhe-uAyvpfqtxnXTgWw4PeM_4WsQeN_xumpcOrEft9ixg0=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87o6yiigut.fsf@europ.lan>
References: <871pvq4yhe.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <87o6yiigut.fsf@europ.lan>
Feedback-ID: 2934448:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: 7S5273767KROSBYNOOBGPCOQNGPHUIY4
CC: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, openpgp@ietf.org
Precedence: list
Subject: [openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Signed Message"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/soKwi6jI1F_K8TDla71vcfcnDzU>

Hi :)

On Monday, March 3rd, 2025 at 10:49, Justus Winter wrote:
> > - If not, should a verifier that encounters (d) attempt to apply CRLF
> >   line endings to the LITb?
> 
> No.

I'm confused by either the answer or the question :')

When I answered yes, I meant, the verifier should normalize the line
endings of the contents of the literal data packet before feeding it
into the hash of the signature.

I agree that it shouldn't affect the data returned to the application.

Best,
Daniel

[openpgp] text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Signed M… Daniel Kahn Gillmor
[openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Sign… Daniel Huigens
[openpgp] encrypting textual data with sop [was: … Daniel Kahn Gillmor
[openpgp] Re: encrypting textual data with sop [w… Daniel Huigens
[openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Sign… Justus Winter
[openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Sign… Daniel Huigens
[openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Sign… Justus Winter
[openpgp] Re: text vs. binary in an OpenPGP "Sign… Andrew Gallagher