On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:26, Bruce Walzer said:
> Perhaps things that accept key fingerprints should ignore anything
> other than hex digits?
Double clicking a word makes things really easy. I also doubt that
anyone will compare a 64 hex digit fingerprint visually. Thus better
paste it and let
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 01:53:59PM +0200, Werner Koch via Gnupg-users wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 16:43, Christian Sommer said:
>
> > I indeed choose to preset the "with-fingerprint" option in my
> > gpg.conf. By removing it, listing my keys give back the full 64
> > character long fingerprint
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 16:43, Christian Sommer said:
> I indeed choose to preset the "with-fingerprint" option in my
> gpg.conf. By removing it, listing my keys give back the full 64
> character long fingerprint of my X448 key.
We once agreed that it is better to show a shortened fingerprint for
On 17 Apr 2024, at 15:43, Christian Sommer wrote:
>
> You are right Andrew!
>
> I indeed choose to preset the "with-fingerprint" option in my
> gpg.conf. By removing it, listing my keys give back the full 64
> character long fingerprint of my X448 key.
Good to hear!
I think the best solution
You are right Andrew!
I indeed choose to preset the "with-fingerprint" option in my
gpg.conf. By removing it, listing my keys give back the full 64
character long fingerprint of my X448 key.
Very nice to come back on this, thx.
Kris.
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 1:00 PM Andrew Gallagher wrote:
>
>
On 28 Mar 2024, at 12:54, Christian Sommer via Gnupg-users
wrote:
>
> when explicitly telling GnuPG to display x448 fingerprints (gpg
> --fingerprint) it just spits out the "abbreviated hex format" by takes
> the first 50 bytes and sweeping the rest under the rug! Not very nice.
Hi, Christian.
On 3 Apr 2024, at 10:32, Werner Koch wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 18:53, Andrew Gallagher said:
>
>> technical challenge since no modern software supports them, and gnupg1
>> doesn’t implement --list-packets :-) But I have to admit they do
>
> Sure it has the --list-packets command. This
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 18:53, Andrew Gallagher said:
> technical challenge since no modern software supports them, and gnupg1
> doesn’t implement --list-packets :-) But I have to admit they do
Sure it has the --list-packets command. This command dates back to the
very first release.
>> But let me
On 2 Apr 2024, at 15:24, Werner Koch wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 12:39, Andrew Gallagher said:
>
>> Are you saying that this is *not* a novel failure mode? Because we’ve
>
> No. We had v2, v3 and v4 keyes in all kind of combinations in the past
> (even as part of subkeys) and back then the
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 12:39, Andrew Gallagher said:
> Are you saying that this is *not* a novel failure mode? Because we’ve
No. We had v2, v3 and v4 keyes in all kind of combinations in the past
(even as part of subkeys) and back then the two OpenPGP implementations
had no problems with that.
On 2 Apr 2024, at 11:58, Werner Koch wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:00, Andrew Gallagher said:
>
>> V5 subkeys of v4 primary keys would appear to introduce a novel
>> failure mode. It should be noted that in crypto-refresh, adding a
>
> Nope.
Are you saying that this is *not* a novel
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:00, Andrew Gallagher said:
> V5 subkeys of v4 primary keys would appear to introduce a novel
> failure mode. It should be noted that in crypto-refresh, adding a
Nope. A v5 key has nothing to do a v4 signature and having different
algorithm on the primary key and the
On 28 Mar 2024, at 09:47, Werner Koch via Gnupg-users
wrote:
>
> x448 keys are created as version 5 keys and version 5 keys come with a
> 32 byte fingerprint (v4 has 20 bytes).
...
> Here is an example:
>
> pub ed25519 2016-02-02 [SC]
> FD8FEC4F8595AB1B6F60D43FC2CED0800E50ACF1
> uid
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:54, Christian Sommer said:
> Likewise by telling GnuPG you really want the short keyID displayed
> (gpg --keyid-format short) it takes the LAST 32 bytes of the FIRST 64
> bytes of the fingerprint.
The thing here is that the short keyid is not from the specification but
a
you are absolutely right:
when explicitly telling GnuPG to display x448 fingerprints (gpg
--fingerprint) it just spits out the "abbreviated hex format" by takes
the first 50 bytes and sweeping the rest under the rug! Not very nice.
Likewise by telling GnuPG you really want the short keyID
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:49, Christian Sommer said:
> on the other hand a x488 fingerprint is 50 hex characters long. let's say
> it's 1 2 3 4 0 0 A B C D then its
> long keyid is 1 2 3 4 and its short keyid is 22 3 4.
x448 keys are created
excuse me sirs. when i wrote that question i was already very tired.
so in the meantime i realized that there are different code paths for
ed/x448 goldilocks.
one of them distinguishes the Endiannes on behalf of the algorithm (e.g.
sets is_little_endian to true | false in g10/ecdh.c).
i haven't
17 matches
Mail list logo
