Re: [openpgp] Summary of WG status

"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Fri, 11 August 2017 20:29 UTC

Return-Path: <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
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 107CB132414 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:29:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (3072-bit key) header.d=crustytoothpaste.net
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 FoO1TVkDbTUL for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:29:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from castro.crustytoothpaste.net (castro.crustytoothpaste.net [75.10.60.170]) (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 0FC1313240D for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:29:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from genre.crustytoothpaste.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:b978:101:254c:7dd1:74c7:cde0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by castro.crustytoothpaste.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30BEC280AD for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 20:29:31 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=crustytoothpaste.net; s=default; t=1502483371; bh=JkqkmgwcBIS1lSypZwUWshp6iF5/Y/VS3f0+z+3bGn0=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=YGCctWRRVqhpBJAFbnzfl9PWd6u5sIHaHvgVq20Na/OtaJZlKW7lGQO8OqOKE5/MZ GAsOyc31BMvCvmRtjhRQLe70H9Lo1Jx+GMCD+XFT4u31XTTLDgn1SGZxEwpbl+HGJ3 Mjq+D1zeFhdTlQFA1gdbtrwEWQ0t4A8gT8zLjqgfpN2C6An1kj/V/Fc3RPU1C74GHq NBpynBg9vYmlGro3b7UpnnUoQ2l74acbDCeLhvdPJwvDPvQaEkGwqilvxRpEfPokuO FrwP8yNE/F163s48NXY6K4caMi2HiNgpAGEUqB/YAVUi5G6snIUq76h8ygM505/rCo oRF8oUKqoWAdk0NxUjC94T8q/nSjTJskPO3n0AzDijgtHTnNBrfLHwr+shmX1KwMhk BTAcND2ihDr5l4SrQ3hfflyazMLZUZiOlQoEJeh4vmb2FJZ08HcvvOqmlbsRgMO5dj JeBDWQTjtLAjLeGuNE7xYzU+e2r6PmHspokOL0jIX6Jkwgod5Hx
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 20:29:24 +0000
From: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
To: openpgp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20170811202924.yiwzjom3tag3ivkk@genre.crustytoothpaste.net>
References: <20170712223852.zmnvw4iwvziqsynq@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> <20170810014751.erufvruh2lm5cdpe@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> <1b68dbbb-38ac-6370-fe20-76be795b2634@sixdemonbag.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4afynygovz5sixlj"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1b68dbbb-38ac-6370-fe20-76be795b2634@sixdemonbag.org>
X-Machine: Running on genre using GNU/Linux on x86_64 (Linux kernel 4.11.0-2-amd64)
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/tU_G_QNeUiy7G9F6iohU4nXS3yE>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Summary of WG status
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 11 Aug 2017 20:29:34 -0000

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 11:02:47PM -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> I am completely against even discussing this right now.  IMO, our #1
> item right now is getting SHA-1 removed from the spec as thoroughly as
> humanly possible.  The next is justifying the continued existence of the WG.
> 
> Everything else -- *everything else* -- is an afterthought.

Okay.  Let me offer a fingerprint proposal, then: SHA-256.  Basically,
identical to Werner's proposal, except with the full SHA-256.  That
resolves all the issues over truncation.  SHA-256 is mandatory to
implement.

Opinions or counterproposals?
-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204