Re: [woes] Naked Public Key, was: RE: Proposed charter, post-Quebec edition

Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> Fri, 05 August 2011 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <leifj@mnt.se>
X-Original-To: woes@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: woes@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA7921F8C36 for <woes@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 07:42:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.17
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.17 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.571, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5rUbo5e4klJn for <woes@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 07:42:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from backup-server.nordu.net (backup-server.nordu.net [IPv6:2001:948:4:1::66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC19C21F8C33 for <woes@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 07:42:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.36.125.212] (dhcp.pilsnet.sunet.se [192.36.125.212]) (authenticated bits=0) by backup-server.nordu.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p75EgWn8009523 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <woes@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 16:42:36 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E3C0158.1090109@mnt.se>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 16:42:32 +0200
From: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: woes@ietf.org
References: <b9332337-4efa-4355-93a9-7866a5506bb5@default> <CA60EB18.D5CF%joe.hildebrand@webex.com> <CABcZeBPWj8GC4nK7qZ_uypk+4uAPtGYhQu3rAdz+xr9AuP13rg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBPWj8GC4nK7qZ_uypk+4uAPtGYhQu3rAdz+xr9AuP13rg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [woes] Naked Public Key, was: RE: Proposed charter, post-Quebec edition
X-BeenThere: woes@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Web Object Encryption and Signing \(woes\) BOF discussion list" <woes.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/woes>, <mailto:woes-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/woes>
List-Post: <mailto:woes@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:woes-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes>, <mailto:woes-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 14:42:20 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>> Just doing the math yourself, from scratch, is pretty easy if you have the
>> bare key.  It's nigh-on trivial if you have a bigint library.  Solution:
>> don't use OpenSSL.  I propose we don't get bogged down in the certificate
>> problem for the moment.
> 
> Cryptographer's warning: do not do this. Hard hat area ahead.
> 

That is advice for implementors and not for spec writers, right?

	Cheers Leif
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk48AVgACgkQ8Jx8FtbMZnfXJQCdHaeYDxsOWxQnfpT6KOoc+Xlx
xcsAn2Nzq7ffeSSk6d0zMuThs6p3qO1J
=Ce7X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----