Re: [OpenPGP] Key Transition

Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.apache.community
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Another question:

When updating my KEYS file (per http://www.apache.org/dev/key-transition.html#transition-export 
), do I replace my old one with the new "dual" export, or do I append  
to the KEYS file?

-Grant

On Aug 19, 2009, at 6:07 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> i plan to prepare a set of instructions for those who have a small key
> and who want to transition to a longer one. most of this should be
> uncontroversial.
>
> there is one area that i think needs some more consideration. i don't
> think that there is a great rush to implement this so - unless anyone
> jumps in with something i've missed - i'll get on with the rest whilst
> this is discussed.
>
> a transition statement is a notice informing the world that the old  
> key
> is being replaced by a new one. it is signed by both the new key and  
> the
> old. for an example, see
> http://www.jroller.com/robertburrelldonkin/entry/openpgp_transition_statement 
> .
>
> providing that the old key has not been compromised, a transition
> statement allows those who trust the old key - and that it hasn't been
> compromised - to resign the new key.
>
> for apache, the risk with recommending this mechanism is that it's  
> less
> secure than signing after a F2F meeting - if a key is compromised then
> transition statements could be published and keys signed in error.
> however, without using transition statements, there is a risk that an
> advance in cryptography will conclusively break SHA-1 or DSA before  
> the
> new apache WOT is viable.
>
> if we decide to recommend transition statements then i recommend  
> asking
> committers to broadcast transition statements using a independent
> trusted communication channel which can be monitored by committers.  
> this
> should provide more security than each person using an ad hoc  
> solution.
>
> for example, asking for statements to be committed to subversion would
> mean that an attacker would have to comprise a users subversion
> credentials as well as their private key. if that change were posted  
> to
> a public mailing list to which that user were subscribed then they  
> would
> be informed that their key had been comprised and could take  
> appropriate
> action.
>
> opinions?
>
> - - robert
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJKi87nAAoJEHl6NpRAqILLjqwQALzaot3LVWJwbCzxb2G9ZHbe
> +1luE6cQ4BH8aEz/S8oZDYq0iekvmJESEYzylalis4H4NEMfoIvTKS5Wdthgwspj
> IKxn6zjAgcj25+WFq+0sd8TK5BGoAYR9HOLkQsUEOFp3w693gbm3lE9XbRkFRMc5
> c/T9n4hVnPXGEih5fzaeHhOxGDcnuRGu4ZSs+GfW/F6hncqhTdqKw8kXTWeQ9es/
> 8xNcIkxULUIOHOgjVgEyQBHCX7zDsW7p3kBysHuYNV3BIKEwSOO660LmEUmnOLYR
> PYqFMEMmpEL8BJYZvtz1b9CG/ROtBWmy7GsjiXAvClWvZw93w5O+/qwFZ6LYQgO2
> IRd+T+RknJzr7KdPE/vzrlCpAITNd5SU4ROpUT9hSj2cig7sZWwaPlC+W4fr+1eA
> fk+PKPANEyBP2SnnNzmm9gOUCLahigHZVNR+8TBJVImAptQqvfpchrcwq+ov55vQ
> AL/msg81DxZaj/TR3tjydy1xu61t2coJ1OAN/yn/UyeFxzyujHxdiHtudaCaAXeP
> 7tfCvEvHa9q4DotvfT5aS6+hVQTUy2Hxd9iOHFwim6ewE2DVsvryeYI3PP60g/Vj
> XLoE6vpkJn3TgObQrhnGzF9vKLRBptYFy0HK8BacOaVdP8oQGeX2/02AGJ7mEwTi
> 7WpvJnmgD1ILnQt6ZrJx
> =BVjD
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.