[openpgp] Re: OpenPGP WG next steps discussion

Hi Simon,

We are interested in Key Transparency for OpenPGP, and have shipped
a version of it: https://proton.me/files/proton_keytransparency_whitepaper.pdf

IMO, what would be most interesting is to do a standardized version
of this based on the work of the Key Transparency WG.

In my view, this doesn't necessarily require an OpenPGP extension
to carry transparency information; that could instead be added to
the HKP API, for example.

That way, we also don't need a distinction between pre-certs
(which are added to the transparency log) and post-certs with
transparency information (which are distributed) like CT has,
which simplifies the design.

Best,
Daniel


On Wednesday, September 17th, 2025 at 09:10, Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi
> 
> Some ideas for future work:
> 
> - FrodoKEM support
> - Classic McEliece support
> - Hybrid signatures
> - Interop considerations with LibrePGP
> - Extensions for Transparency log chain assertions
> 
> I've been trying to reach folks interested in the last one, to brigde
> the PGP and Sigstore/Sigsum communities to see if we can get PGP to
> support transparency chained signatures somehow. If anyone is
> interested in exploring this, let me know. I think a PGP extension to
> carry transparency information of the signature/publickey would be
> fairly simple to specify.
> 
> /Simon
> _______________________________________________
> openpgp mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]