[openpgp] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-persistent-symmetric-keys-01.txt

Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com> Thu, 30 January 2025 16:46 UTC

Return-Path: <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
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 173E7C1D6FB0 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 08:46:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
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 lTtOH523FJgn for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 08:46:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-40134.protonmail.ch (mail-40134.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.134]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E71EC1D8779 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 08:46:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1738255568; x=1738514768; bh=wakYnk3uTE9aW9fig23EdxzZMCa+eCMNmnVO5D2afZg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector:List-Unsubscribe:List-Unsubscribe-Post; b=zFGhgW3XXuxt5oLN3EtZ3MLtXAFpgVbQkQ+cLyGYYEHIKpczaFW30D2JamoTqGlck n3nNg9xvbD8I8tZXLsJN9EcM+hvxN4nyFNIHw9aMTK5hOsHqJoT9vfw+/3Nq0pitY5 zOMy1KMDuYy8HynhrI1GT0rqCWIX+yZVcbTOGkOX5haS01LkXx5Idg+elZ/JiUMmc7 rismF1t37Q/KPd4C/5wEU7srbGs184yaF2DGstORXAjtBjSC5t3h/rfMj3u6dDAXub WwILlFVjv29hB9QC1MM9JnM+eOnZ5uJ4/as/+50xlNYNWrgVdfPgHXh0CJUlKBgZfh kewTod1MY+B2w==
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 16:46:02 +0000
To: openpgp@ietf.org
From: Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <Uw9c3PaYYP69Q-MnmFS-1GFB_EzAxcz2Wx3HwsBZoEGkUSMCcYmNi_PcSJf-k_1zrc0eWWsYJUN748YOZwbEko_YMvjX9rThYsdx1EkkFL4=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <173825534302.1429689.3523877853718631076@dt-datatracker-5584d84fb4-tg2td>
References: <173825534302.1429689.3523877853718631076@dt-datatracker-5584d84fb4-tg2td>
Feedback-ID: 2934448:user:proton
X-Pm-Message-ID: cdd1efa1f6c66a5bd56ee147f9c730dab5be72b7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: 43XVDBCMVBQH224SNVESIXMLHSMNJPIY
X-Message-ID-Hash: 43XVDBCMVBQH224SNVESIXMLHSMNJPIY
X-MailFrom: d.huigens@protonmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-openpgp.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [openpgp] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-persistent-symmetric-keys-01.txt
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/ywWOjw8KGLckA3jzVDG95hM8TNY>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:openpgp-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:openpgp-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:openpgp-leave@ietf.org>

Hi all,

I've finally published a new version of draft-ietf-openpgp-persistent-
symmetric-keys. Apologies it took so long.


Since we've last discussed the draft, I've reduced the number of
reserved code points for future persistent symmetric algorithms,
based on the feedback in the meeting.


The other concrete open question was whether it's necessary to be able
to derive the public key material from the private key material.

Before changing things back and potentially forth again, I wanted to
ask the working group whether it would be reasonable, in this case,
to require storing the public key fields together with the private key
(e.g. when storing the key in hardware, or some such)?

Note that the amount of data to store doesn't change, just whether that
data comes from the public key fields or the private key fields.

Note also that there are other existing algorithms where deriving the
public key material from the private key material isn't possible
(including ECDH and ECDSA), though for {X,Ed}{25519,448} it is
possible, which could be considered a nice property.


Anyway, let me know what you think, and whether you have any other
feedback, otherwise we can discuss it in the interim meeting :)

Best,
Daniel