Re: [openpgp] v5 in the crypto-refresh draft

On Fri 2021-06-04 14:10:36 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>     > (2) appears to prepare for keys larger than 65536 octets.  This looks
>     > like post-quantum planning to me, but we are not including any PQ
>     > schemes in the specification, and it's not clear that this change on
>     > its own would be sufficient to support such a new scheme (especially
>     > because there doesn't seem to be any CFRG consensus on what PQ scheme
>     > to endorse yet).
>
> Sure, but wouldn't it help a v5 implementation to more intelligently skip
> such a thing?  I don't know if we can support multiple signatures with
> different algorithms.
Would it?  In what context?  The change for (2) has to do with how to
structure data fed into a hash algorithm for a certification ("key
signature") but isn't anything on the wire.

Honestly, i find (2) the least problematic of the changes listed -- it
doesn't affect the wire format, and it's just a slight change to the
hashing algorithm which already needs a special case for the bytes
hashed (0x99 for v4 vs 0x9a for v5).  If the WG decides that the change
in (2) is worth keeping because it just might come in handy for some
as-yet-unspecified scheme, that's a plausible argument to me, but i
don't see how it helps anyone skip over anything.  Can you explain more?

    --dkg

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp