[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: weird OpenPGP expiration dates in AM reports [was: Re: AM report for Daniel Kahn Gillmor]



On 04/23/2009 12:54 PM, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:45:11PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> I suspect that the scripts used to generate these reports aren't used to
>> dealing with keys with different expiration dates.  Since the debian
>> project probably currently only cares about OpenPGP usage for signing
> 
> This isn't correct; the initial account password is sent out encrypted
> to the key so it has to have a valid encryption part.

Ah, thanks.  I haven't gotten to that stage of the process myself yet ;)

In that case, i think the right calculation would be to run the steps i
initially proposed twice, once looking at the signing usage flag (0x02),
and a second time looking at the encrypted communications usage flag
(0x04).  The result would be the earliest date of the two runs.

	--dkg

PS details on usage flags:
   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4880#section-5.2.3.21

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: