Re: [openpgp] Can the OpenPGP vs. S/MIME situation be fixed?

Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse> Sun, 03 July 2016 07:43 UTC

Return-Path: <look@my.amazin.horse>
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 41BF512D0CC for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 00:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 C5QPCqgyCt8Y for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 00:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.mugenguild.com (mugenguild.com [5.135.189.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04A4212D09B for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 00:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.47.194.64] (unknown [89.204.135.64]) by mail.mugenguild.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 412365FC11; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 09:43:13 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2016 09:43:05 +0200
From: Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse>
To: openpgp@ietf.org, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwhoaRCqp+-K4aGq9ALAh0bctYnOGRzYQSm5VA5RLVCaNg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160701153304.332d2c95@pc1> <sjmwpl5qtqy.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <CAMm+LwjGZeZTpUjOp_McDrp6cMQQn=Sy6Wp+Ti5M--V4vnMDqw@mail.gmail.com> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4CB8706@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <CAMm+LwhoaRCqp+-K4aGq9ALAh0bctYnOGRzYQSm5VA5RLVCaNg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0342C725-9E44-4F34-B4C6-3CDDEE17F1BE@my.amazin.horse>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="----R9L9KRZL8YALCRRMUY8AIQWYG7OQFH"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/w3j4PesXr060rm4NLXE1fP8rT1A>
Cc: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hanno_B=F6ck?= <hanno@hboeck.de>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Can the OpenPGP vs. S/MIME situation be fixed?
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sun, 03 Jul 2016 07:43:19 -0000

*queue n+1 competing standards xkcd

 -  V

On 3 July 2016 02:24:04 CEST, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Peter Gutmann
><pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
>wrote:
>
>> Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> writes:
>>
>> >I have wanted this for a long time. there are actually three
>separate
>> >problems to be solved.
>> >
>> >1) How to make S/MIME work with OpenPGP credentials
>> >
>> >2) How to make OpenPGP work with S/MIME credentials
>> >
>> >3) How to merge the two specifications into one.
>>
>> The first two are pretty easy, I've been doing that for years.  For
>S/MIME,
>> use the subjectKeyIdentifier form of the key ID.  For PGP, use an
>> issuerAndSerialNumber in a type-and-value subpacket.
>>
>> The third is impossible.  While at an abstract level PGP and S/MIME
>do the
>> same thing, the bit-bagging formats used to encode the abstraction
>are
>> completely incompatible.  You can't make them compatible without
>either
>> moving
>> S/MIME to the PGP format or PGP to the S/MIME format.  I can't see
>either
>> of
>> those happening...
>
>
>​
>That would clearly be impossible if it was what was being proposed.
>
>What I am suggesting is rather different, A new application for
>managing
>encrypted content, Word, Powerpoint, PDF, etc. that has crypto designed
>into the metal and also provides a messaging capability.
>
>I am suggesting Blu Ray, not trying to develop adapters to play VHS on
>Betamax.
>​