Re: [openpgp] Weird OIDs in the 4880bis draft

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 14 February 2023 14:39 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 2C908C16B5A2 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 06:39:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.094
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.094 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 2qYagrIACJXD for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 06:39:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::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 13DAEC15270B for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 06:39:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PGP3s3tKzzFPV; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:39:21 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1676385561; bh=Nrpefcis6KEHq38Xd4iicuBBAq3ltqVLGzkEsMQGqr4=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Im4m6hBYp5IBdFEQ1ocb3kaCwIDRiZFFXOuy4QezaWlG3YNQp45y5qvl0c1PuMuVv 3TIHvqclLXTGFnmqVGjf+sncrFQjXhrgE8JE/JP7KAJ9HqMeU8Ws9hkRgUhOd5lpkT XBzRLyQ1ZYxd1Ruts1f+5kIslunSYekIuuOP/arI=
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 sWuFgdokrKy2; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:39:20 +0100 (CET)
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; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:39:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CBF347C0FE3; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 09:39:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C83027C0FE2; Tue, 14 Feb 2023 09:39:19 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 09:39:19 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
cc: "openpgp@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <878rh0tzkl.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
Message-ID: <072ad857-1591-cc9a-4276-d351bb2a327d@nohats.ca>
References: <SY4PR01MB6251048223366D25E14FF34FEEDE9@SY4PR01MB6251.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com> <24d23b9f-50b4-0a80-d1a5-63b20c366a54@nohats.ca> <878rh0tzkl.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/yyvZ3s8woJAmpza40GO_1XuEIjE>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Weird OIDs in the 4880bis draft
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: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 14:39:29 -0000

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023, Werner Koch wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 19:05, Paul Wouters said:
>
>> I think we should use the new OIDs and mention the old OIDs in the draft
>> for backwards compatibility.
>
> Using new OIDs will eventually make keys and signatures created since 8
> years invalid.  Further deployed software won't be able to handle any
> newly created signature or key.

This is good point to take into consideration. Is there a way forward
that takes this into account? eg for v6 we can make changes, but perhaps
for v3/v4 we need to keep using the old OIDs.

Thanks for this input Werner.

>  This is crazy, folks.
>
> Sometimes I can't but fear the goal of the WG is to harm the repudiation
> of OpenPGP.

This part however, is not helpful to make the internet work better.

Paul