why is SHA1 used? How do I get SHA256 to be used?

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On 07/12/2012 08:16 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 22:55, nicholas.cole at gmail.com said:
> 
>> But one thing that might be helpful to explain is this: what needs to
>> be in the V5 key format aside from the change in fingerprint hash?
>> Aside from that issue, the V4 key format seems to have been resilient.
>>  What are the other issues that need to be addressed?
> 
> We need to check the WG archives for a list.  What I can remember are:
>  
> - A new fingerprint scheme
> 
> - A hard (non-changeable) expiration time
> 
> - A different way to express timestamps (Y2038 annoyance and the hard
>   Y2106 problem).  An 8601 timestamp string should do.
> 
> - Get rid of the old and optional protection schemes or even switch to a
>   modern standard one.
> 
> There are related things we need to change for signatures packets.  It
> might also be a good time to replace PKCS#1.5,

some other points (from memory):

 * Issuer subpacket should use a full fingerprint, rather than a short keyID

 * designated revoker signature should embed full key instead of
fingerprint.

	--dkg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1030 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20120712/2e47967e/attachment.pgp>