[openpgp] Re: Specifying OpenPGP file extensions (and MIME type)?
Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.openpgp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
No hats on for this message. On Wed 2024-12-04 16:50:43 +0000, Daniel Huigens wrote: > Since the name of the standard is OpenPGP, I think .pgp is fine as a > filename, since it can also just be considered an abbreviation of > that. I agree with this. > Beyond a filename, it would also be nice to have a MIME type for PGP > messages. RFC3156 does define application/pgp-encrypted, but uses it > only for the "Version: 1" control text, while using > application/octet-stream for the actual encrypted data. right, the Media type "application/pgp-encrypted" is taken, meaning this "control" part of an RFC3156-formatted message. So it probably shouldn't be used for the things that we're talking about here. (as an aside, i think the PGP/MIME specification of this "conntrol" part is remarkably unhelpful; as an implementer, i have no idea what to do if the contents are anything other than "Version: 1", so it's just meaningless boilerplate in every message) I know that /etc/mime.types as shipped with debian isn't the same thing as the formal IANA Media Type registry (which doesn't say anything about filename "extensions", but these are what i've got on my system: 0 dkg@bob:~$ grep pgp /etc/mime.types application/pgp-encrypted pgp application/pgp-keys asc key application/pgp-signature sig 0 dkg@bob:~$ those three media types are defined in RFC 3156. Note that the mapping of the "pgp" filename extension does appear to imply a reuse of the "application/pgp-encrypted" media type for encrypted messages *and* the "control" part. That seems problematic. > Perhaps we could define application/pgp-message, to cover both > encrypted messages and inline-signed messages, for example? Is there a reason to use the same media type for both kinds of messages? If we're defining media types, why not define two distinct ones: one for an inline-signed message and one for an encrypted message? I know there has been talk of refining/constraining the OpenPGP message grammar. It seems to me that any such work would be a reasonable place to try to define a clean set of media types. --dkg _______________________________________________ openpgp mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 324 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wr0EARYKAG8FgmdhnYIJEHctFh41zUuBRxQAAAAAAB4AIHNhbHRAbm90YXRpb25z LnNlcXVvaWEtcGdwLm9yZ7ZtQ8fCjOP7MGLOBvcbNb+DIPMSf0c4D5gn994e/isS FiEEdLwExD2GCEvoZywGdy0WHjXNS4EAABqlAQDT92g8rNHt2vtAZNYd/o4liIBQ +sGU8ZjwmVcgtsQQJQEApuSFG7p9mbOjzSbs3qfis1bOmri5I+Tdb3YUvJpw6Qs= =2+DV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----