IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Definition of Subkey Revocation Signatures

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Mon, 29 May 2023 13:30 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 40BAAC15154A for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2023 06:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.395
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.395 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_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 qcB604yrZU3H for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2023 06:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.85]) (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 5D6C0C151540 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2023 06:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4QVGcq6PJ7z3Bq; Mon, 29 May 2023 15:30:51 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1685367051; bh=FqWcaIBS5DMAWuSekEyfVRxXPxrB5OujbX7YdOyIDFk=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=HiqK3L4UtARssROizpRPMaU500NMoTn1eIwf4wuLqEDJWaTPG4kgbcUVM9f4MAI1+ 0R/IhNWqIJOfKCDRgB+v0goqV4zUfbEoOdB8arpLGe0kbP9SERI9Oak9Z8zfMiFJ+p VHpsI9p7vm9rN6RGfhn1hhQOnl+YoBtJ1lseKaxg=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XAvlQGuUuheF; Mon, 29 May 2023 15:30:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 29 May 2023 15:30:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 06668FF6303; Mon, 29 May 2023 09:30:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05113FF6302; Mon, 29 May 2023 09:30:50 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 29 May 2023 09:30:49 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Paul Schaub <vanitasvitae@fsfe.org>
cc: openpgp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <b850fdd2-69b1-fb18-086e-06c94c0cc13b@fsfe.org>
Message-ID: <c756f65c-16ee-0a4f-a839-495e49561b7b@nohats.ca>
References: <b850fdd2-69b1-fb18-086e-06c94c0cc13b@fsfe.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/urcJxaExGcLMg6YbugJYUctpCPs>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Definition of Subkey Revocation Signatures
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: Mon, 29 May 2023 13:30:58 -0000

On Thu, 11 May 2023, Paul Schaub wrote:

> While hacking around I discovered, that there was a discrepancy between my implementation and rfc4880 that surprised me.
> 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#section-5.2.1 states for section 0x28:
>
>    0x28: Subkey revocation signature
>        The signature is calculated directly on the subkey being revoked.
>        [...]
> 
> In my code, I calculated the signature over the primary key and the subkey instead.

> Since I haven't had any interoperability problems with other implementations with regards to subkey revocations in the past, I
> suspect that most implementations did not follow the spec to the word either and did how I did.
> 
> Therefore I proposed a patch that brings the wording of 0x28 signatures in line with 0x18 and 0x19:
> https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis/-/merge_requests/307

This has been merged too.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email