2.3.1: compilation result without dirmngr (due to --disable-ldap?)
Steffen Nurpmeso
steffen at sdaoden.eu
Mon Aug 2 15:47:03 CEST 2021
Werner Koch wrote in
<87v94p5zhk.fsf at wheatstone.g10code.de>:
|On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 17:04, Steffen Nurpmeso said:
|
|> and the compilation does not include dirmngr, making the entire
|> installation useless. (I personally still use gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.23,
|
|I just tried with --disable-ldap and --disable-nls and can't see a
|problem. it the current master version though.
Fine this is fixed.
|> i have not looked at the protocol, but sigh that not
|> a standardized checksum over the email address was chosen, like
|
|SHA-1 is a very standard algorithm and fully sufficient for the purpose
|here; i.e. mapping a string to a fixed length identifier. SHA-1 is
|anyway a required part of OpenPGP and there have been no security
|weaknesses found its use case as fingerprint algorithms.
Yes, no, my problem is about the the special z-base-32 step, for
which there is no tool around by default. But i personally still
struggle with the base64 that SSH now uses for fingerprinting,
i find this very hard. Yes i had seen discussion in the PGP IETF
list about such base'ing, but i _personally_ cannot grasp
z5fuz1m868tz5eeq3y86cnomqztbbyjd. Now that i have RFC 6189
i could of course take the algorithm of section 5.1.6 and
implement it. You know. It is more like .. i did not understand
why so complicated as that is nowhere human anyway, is it? Well,
unless you plan to use this way of hashing as a default in
a future GnuPG version of course. (I personally would very much
favour these nice groups of four hexdecimal bytes, as can be
produced with --fingerprint (in 1.4.*), even though it gets very
lengthy with SHA-256 or longer, but people only look at the tail
and the front, and maybe snippets in the middle, i think that was
talked about in the IETF group like this, no? .. i can confirm.
Ok, maybe if grouped by four it would work out anyway, looking at
it. But nonetheless. If grouped by four i would _assume_ that
lower/upper would even help differentiating, ie, base64 because it
is in use quite often, with OpenSSH even in user view. You know,
just doing echo BLA|sha1sum|base64 if you are on a Unix.
Whatever. Greetings to NRW!)
Ciao,
--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)
More information about the Gnupg-devel
mailing list