Closed antonsviridenko closed 1 year ago
@andrey-utkin are you interested to take this task?
Legit issue. Happy to take it. Would love to see what @ronaldtse or @ni4 think about its priority, though.
@andrey-utkin it would be good to have this functionality, feel free to take this issue.
Thank you @andrey-utkin @antonsviridenko !
So I want to implement --expert
mode for subkey generation, now it looks like this for default primary & sub keypair.
Please select what kind of key you want:
(1) RSA (Encrypt or Sign)
(16) DSA + ElGamal
(17) DSA + RSA
(19) ECDSA + ECDH
(22) EDDSA + X25519
(99) SM2
I want to implement something similar for subkey algo selection. What was the logic in assigning these numbers? RFC says
ID Algorithm
-- ---------
1 - RSA (Encrypt or Sign) [[HAC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-HAC)]
2 - RSA Encrypt-Only [[HAC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-HAC)]
3 - RSA Sign-Only [[HAC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-HAC)]
16 - Elgamal (Encrypt-Only) [[ELGAMAL](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-ELGAMAL)] [[HAC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-HAC)]
17 - DSA (Digital Signature Algorithm) [[FIPS186](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-FIPS186)] [[HAC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880#ref-HAC)]
18 - Reserved for Elliptic Curve
19 - Reserved for ECDSA
20 - Reserved (formerly Elgamal Encrypt or Sign)
21 - Reserved for Diffie-Hellman (X9.42,
as defined for IETF-S/MIME)
100 to 110 - Private/Experimental algorithm
So looks like 16 applies to the subkey algorithm, but for option 19 it is a primary key algo. looks inconsistent. And what document does define number 99 for SM2?
Is it ok if I just number selection options by successive numbers from 1 to 7? Like this
printf("Please select subkey algorithm you want:\n"
"\t(1) RSA\n"
"\t(2) DSA\n"
"\t(3) ElGamal\n"
"\t(4) ECDSA\n"
"\t(5) EDDSA\n"
"\t(6) ECDH\n"
"\t(7) SM2"
"> ");
@ni4 @ronaldtse
@antonsviridenko not sure about the real reasons, but for me it seems to resemble RFC numbers where it is applicable. 16 for DSA-ElGamal most likely was used to distinguish between DSA-EG and DSA-RSA keypairs. 99 (as far as I remember) was picked for SM2 using 'pre-experimental' number, to not interfere with other implementations could be using 100-110. OSCCA RFC marks it as TBD (to be defined): https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ribose-openpgp-oscca-01
My suggestion would be to stick to the already existing behaviour, using the RFC-defined numbers, as you will not need any tricks to distinguish between DSA-EG and DSA-RSA keys.
Description
Looks like this basic & important feature was discussed and planned to be implemented long time ago (like here https://github.com/rnpgp/rnp/issues/323) but is not implemented yet.
Steps to Reproduce
There is no
rnpkeys
command to add new subkeys. One has to use GnuPG command line tool for this task.Expected Behavior
rnpkeys
should support adding subkeys. This feature can be implemented in multiple ways:--add-subkey
with primary key specified as a parameter.--subkey
to the--generate-key
command.--edit-key
command functionality.