[openpgp] Re: canonicalizing document for OpenPGP "Text Si gnature" (sig typeID 0x01) [was: Re: Re: Analysis d ocument]
Falko Strenzke <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.openpgp |
|---|---|
| Organization | MTG AG |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Am 16.09.25 um 20:53 schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor: > On Tue 2025-09-16 13:55:12 +0200, Falko Strenzke wrote: >> I would happily create an erratum if only I understood what is meant by >> this text if not reencoding. Is it meant to signify a persistent >> */modification/* of the document to be signed? I can't believe that, as >> that would mean a substantial side effect. > I think it simply means "feed the UTF-8, CRLF form of the document into > the digest algorithm for signing". > > As a concrete example, consider the standard tools iconv [0] and todos > [1]. If the message is encoded in ISO-8859-1, feed it into the standard > input of "iconv -f iso-8859-1 -t utf-8 | todos", and use the standard > output of that pipeline in the signing process. > > [0]https://manpages.debian.org/stable/manpages/iconv.1.en.html > [1]https://manpages.debian.org/stable/tofrodos/todos.1.en.html > > This leaves the original document in all its iso-8859-1, linefeed-only > splendor, while still producing a signature over the canonicalized form. That's what I call "UTF-8 re-encoding before signature generation and verification". So at least we could clarify that. Clearly, this is what I understood all the time. Thus there is no need for an erratum. Best regards, Falko > > A verifier can perform the a comparable transformation before verifying, > since they might have received the same document encoded in many > different possible ways, due to "helpful" intervening agents in whatever > chain of copies took it from the signer to the verifier. > > The key insight here is that digital documents can appear in many > different forms, and there is no difference between the "original" and a > copy. At the same time, digital documents are typically not transmitted > so much as they are copied. > > Is the "original" transformed during the course of signing? It could be, > if the signer decides to replace it with the canonicalized form! If it > is, it will be a new file. If it isn't transformed, that should be OK > too. Both encodings of the document will have a verifiable signature, > if it is sig typeID 0x01 (Text Signature). > > --dkg > > _______________________________________________ > openpgp mailing list [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email [email protected] -- *MTG AG* Dr. Falko Strenzke Phone: +49 6151 8000 24 E-Mail: [email protected] Web: mtg.de <https://www.mtg.de> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MTG AG - Dolivostr. 11 - 64293 Darmstadt, Germany Commercial register: HRB 8901 Register Court: Amtsgericht Darmstadt Management Board: Jürgen Ruf (CEO), Tamer Kemeröz Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Dr. Thomas Milde This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the correct recipient or have received this email in error, please inform the sender immediately and delete this email.Unauthorised copying or distribution of this email is not permitted. Data protection information: Privacy policy <https://www.mtg.de/en/privacy-policy> _______________________________________________ openpgp mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
smime.p7s
(application/pkcs7-signature, 4.9 KB) - not displayed