Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD39431FB6 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:11:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id izoOcJ2I6LfC for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:11:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz (mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.12.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7C02431FB5 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:11:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=uoa; t=1295395906; x=1326931906; h=from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:message-id:date; z=From:=20Peter=20Gutmann=20 |To:=20ietf-openpgp@imc.org,=20nagydani@epointsystem.org |Subject:=20Re:=20including=20the=20entire=20fingerprint =20of=20the=20issuer=20in=20an=20OpenPGP=20certification |Cc:=20dkg@fifthhorseman.net,=20notmuch@notmuchmail.org |In-Reply-To:=20<4D3564E4.1010203@epointsystem.org> |Message-Id:=20|Date:=20Wed,=2019=20Jan=202011=2013:11:43=20+1300; bh=ntqTGfQQ7qJId6UnhG6SWZGCvU1kjRdQOe3fJLjkxm4=; b=P4mu8ghuVQ0zNplx9DliJpwJojuVTK66Mfiy3fCIquA/oEY4s9cJn2IL yL6/amBiu85bSi6xaTPGKbO+q8+xtSQty2jcPuRICa/Y9toHj69jxTyqH 4aSGU9Ww8zB2szCWMYdMn7wwU1dwz3PN9yut8hTyEB9kh0/2N50Z2o6yx c=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,341,1291546800"; d="scan'208";a="42824993" X-Ironport-HAT: APP-SERVERS - $RELAYED X-Ironport-Source: 130.216.33.150 - Outgoing - Outgoing Received: from mf1.fos.auckland.ac.nz ([130.216.33.150]) by mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 19 Jan 2011 13:11:43 +1300 Received: from login01.fos.auckland.ac.nz ([130.216.34.40]) by mf1.fos.auckland.ac.nz with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfLeJ-0005es-Gh; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:11:43 +1300 Received: from pgut001 by login01.fos.auckland.ac.nz with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfLeJ-0002cY-4A; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:11:43 +1300 From: Peter Gutmann To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org, nagydani@epointsystem.org Subject: Re: including the entire fingerprint of the issuer in an OpenPGP certification In-Reply-To: <4D3564E4.1010203@epointsystem.org> Message-Id: Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:11:43 +1300 Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:11:53 -0000 "Daniel A. Nagy" writes: >generating a new key with the same 64-bit key ID as an existing key is on the >very far end of the realm of feasibility. That should be: generating a *secure* new key with the same 64-bit key ID as an existing key is on the very far end of the realm of feasibility. If you don't mind that your key's weak then it's not that much more work than just finding a 64-bit collision. Peter.