Question on Integrity of Sequoia-PGP Developers

[Vincent Breitmoser]

Hey List and Matt,

 > It’s one thing to have varying implementations of a given standard. We
 > just can’t be having multiple standards surrounding the same thing.

Well, that's what we ended up with. GnuPG has also been emitting 
LibrePGP packets by default for some years by now, so it's not just 
something that's coming soon, it's already here. And on the flip side,
support of OpenPGP v6 is fairly complete in most big implementations and 
everyone is moving on to PQC, although none emit v6 by default yet as 
far as I'm aware. There are some comparison charts here:

https://sequoia-pgp.gitlab.io/openpgp-interoperability-test-suite/results.html?q=v6#test-summary

 > But as an engineer, if I get in there and find out Koch was right
 > about LibrePGP and that that should’ve been the next version, but we
 > go end up ratifying the other one instead, I’m just going to rage quit

To give you a starting point, there is a comparison of OpenPGP and 
LibrePGP from a technical and spec management perspective here:

https://github.com/crypto-security-tools/OpenPGP-LibrePGP-comparison/blob/main/opgp-lpgp-comp.pdf

Cheers

  - V