On 2015-05-21 15:21, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On Thu 2015-05-21 11:59:07 -0400, mofo syne wrote: > > You might see a few copies around. This one is edited and streamlined with > > some advice from Hasimir to help keep this proposal focused. This is > > mirrored in here > > <http://www.reddit.com/r/GnuPG/comments/36lmih/i_wonder_if_there_is_a_gpg_uri/> > > This proposal appears to be trying to do a lot of different things. I'm > not convinced that they are all reasonable goals, or that gnupg-users is > the right mailing list to discuss them on. The open...@ietf.org is a > mailing list where different people discuss the standard in general. > > The example you give toward the end of the spec (uri handlers in web > browsers) is an important example for arguing why something like this is > concretely useful. Have you tried to implement this? Can modern web > browser handlers work with arbitrary length data? When i try to trigger > a local handler for an unknown schema in iceweasel (firefox) i see this > message: >
Modern browsers can handle this. Some websites embed base64 uri-encoded images of several kb in length and all browsers handle this properly. > -------------- > The address wasn't understood > > Iceweasel doesn't know how to open this address, because one of the > following protocols (openpgp) isn't associated with any program or is not > allowed in this context. > > You might need to install other software to open this address. > -------------- > > with no option to choose an external handler or anything. > The same happens with several other quite standard protocols. Even some of those listed on rfc3986. This is a firefox issue, IMHO. This is configured via about:preferences#applications, since firefox does not respect OS settings in this aspect at all. > Chromium, on the other hand, offers to launch "xdg-open" with that URL > as the parameter, which fails because no handler is registered for the > scheme in question. Is this the intended mechanism, or something else? > > > openpgp://pubkey;version:GnuPG+v2;!base64::<base64 data> > That sounds like the expected behaviour if there's no registered handler. The same would happen with things like "mailto:" if you had none. > There is already a vCard spec for a full pubkey -- though you might > actually mean "transferable public key" or OpenPGP certificate: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6350#section-6.8.1 > Yeah, this seems to invalidate the strongest use-case for this specification. > > openpgp://msg;version:GnuPG+v2;!base64::<base64 data> > > When is this useful? > > > openpgp://sigmsg;hash:SHA1;sig:<base64>;!::<percent encoded message> > > what about a message that is both signed and encrypted? how should it > be represented? > > > * Embedded in NFC or 2D barcode for physical messages in posters that is > > able store encrypted messages, public keys, or signed messages. Other than > > posters, it also allows for easier transferring of openpgp messages via NFC > > or 2D barcodes between a webbrowser in a cybercafe to a smartphone. > > These seem more likely to be handled by vCard or some similar approach > to me. > On some scenarios. But we need some sort of glue to import something from a vCard into gnupg's keyring. I don't think we need a new spec for this though. > > openpgp://fprint;name:clark+kent;::43:51:43:a1:b5:fc:8b:b7:0a:3a:a9:b1:0f:66:73:a8 > > > > openpgp://fprint;::43:51:43:a1:b5:fc:8b:b7:0a:3a:a9:b1:0f:66:73:a8 > > These fingerprints are only 128 bits long, which matches the OpenPGPv3 > fingerprint format. OpenPGPv4 fingerprints are 160 bits long, and any > new fingerprint standard might be longer still. > > Your proposal here doesn't mention any sort of versioning for > fingerprints, or take into account other concerns. > > A large discussion about fingerprint encodings for low-bandwidth > transmission can be found here: > > https://github.com/open-keychain/open-keychain/issues/1281 > > hth, > > --dkg > > _______________________________________________ > Gnupg-users mailing list > Gnupg-users@gnupg.org > http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users -- Hugo Osvaldo Barrera A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users