[openpgp] Re: Call for adoption: draft-gallagher-openpgp-h kp-10 (Ends 2026-05-14)

Michael Richardson <[email protected]> Mon, 04 May 2026 11:42:36 -0400

Newsgroups	gmane.ietf.openpgp
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Andrew Gallagher <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> Is this the bit about detached revocations?  What do you feel is
    >>> unclear?
    >> All of it...  When do do clients upload detached revocations?  That's
    >> why I'm saying that we need a lifecycle model.

    > If you mean "when do they upload detached revocations as opposed to
    > revoked certificates?" then the answer is "when they're using legacy
    > software". In practice, this means "GnuPG"...

...

    >> I think that one possible conclusion from that old argument was that
    >> clients might need to provide revocation signatures to key servers, to
    >> be embargoed against some time where the key server has to forget the
    >> key.  This has different security issues that were discussed at the
    >> time.  (The key server now has stuff that can be abused)

    > ISTR the suggestion for keyserver escrow of revocation signatures was
    > more concerned with the keyholder losing their secret key material. But
    > I agree about there being security and availability tradeoffs.

We have not yet, as a society, figured out how our credentials need to be
retired when we pass away (or go senile).   That's almost the same as losing
secret key material.   That's why I'm saying there needs to be a lifecycle
model.


--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

**       My working hours and your working hours may be different.         **
** Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours **

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

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 487 B)