algorithm IDs (was: Re: OpenPGP keys and Suite-B)

[Len Sassaman <rabbi@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Werner Koch wrote:

> Recall what happened with Camellia: It is now a year since David Shaw
> implemented that cipher in GnuPG but we are still not able to enable
> this because the RFC process has not been finished.  We have not even
> agreed within the WG on algorithm identifiers.  Taking a year for such a
> simple change - even with consensus in the WG that we want to have
> Camellia in OpenPGP - is not really a useful way to get going with a new
> cipher or a new curve.  OIDS nicely solve this problem for curves.

I really don't like OIDs, given the potential for format-based attacks
that they introduce, but we're already using them anyway. I would like to
see them phased out by v5 though.

However, I see a very large problem here with the "it takes a year to get
an algorithm ID" situation. What's holding that up? And while we're at it,
can we get an algorithm ID assigned for WHIRLPOOL?

> We should not drop a better technical better solution just for the
> benefit that it is less work.  If you need help, just send me the source
> of your ID and I do the editing.  I'd really like to get an ECC draft
> out so that we can get ECDSA into GnuPG to start experimenting with it.
> (DSA 2048bit is a bit slow and a transient interop problem)

How was PGP 7.5 handling this? Just one specified curve, or?



--Len.