[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191018161121.6qe5kkweh4u77gvn@LykOS.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 12:11:22 -0400
From: Santiago Torres Arias <santiago@....edu>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
workflows@...r.kernel.org, Git Mailing List <git@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Eric Wong <e@...24.org>
Subject: Re: email as a bona fide git transport
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 12:03:43PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:54:09AM -0400, Santiago Torres Arias wrote:
> > > Seeing how large this signature is, I have to admit that I am partial to
> > > Konstantin's suggestion of using minisign. This seems like something
> > > that could be added to git as an alternative to gpg without too much
> > > trouble, I think.
> >
> > I wonder how big the pgp payload would be with ed25519 as the underlying
> > algorithm. AFAICT, the payload of a minisign signature vs a signature
> > packet have almost the same fields...
>
> It's smaller, but it's not a one-liner. Here's a comparison using ED25519
> keys of the same length:
>
> minisign:
>
> RWQ4kF9UdFgeSt3LqnS3WnrLlx2EnuIFW7euw5JnLUHY/79ipftmj7A2ug7FiR2WmnFNoSacWr7llBuyInVmRL/VRovj1LFtvA0=
>
> pgp:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iHUEARYIAB0WIQR2vl2yUnHhSB5njDW2xBzjVmSZbAUCXaniFAAKCRC2xBzjVmSZ
> bHA5AP46sSPFJfL2tbXwswvj0v2DjLAQ9doxl9bfj9iPZu+3qwEAw5qAMbjw9teL
> L7+NbJ0WVniDWTgt+5ruQ2V9vyfYxAc=
> =B/St
Yeah, the discrepancy mostly comes from pgp embedding a timestamp and a
longer keyid (+a full keyid fingerprint in pgp 2.1+). Minisign keyids
are 8 random bytes, apparently.
It doesn't seem like an amazing win in terms of succintness, imvho...
Cheers!
-Santiago.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists