watchglass: 205.134.172.4:8333 : (172-4.core.ai.net) Alive: (0.023s) V=70001 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.7.0.1/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 205.134.172.27:8333 : Alive: (0.083s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825 (Operator: asciilifeform)
watchglass: 71.114.46.209:8333 : (pool-71-114-46-209.washdc.fios.verizon.net) Alive: (0.094s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825 (Operator: asciilifeform)
watchglass: 205.134.172.26:8333 : Alive: (0.142s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 54.39.156.171:8333 : (ns562940.ip-54-39-156.net) Alive: (0.118s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 205.134.172.6:8333 : (172-6.core.ai.net) Alive: (0.129s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 208.94.240.42:8333 : Alive: (0.085s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 143.202.160.10:8333 : Alive: (0.152s) V=70001 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.7.0.1/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 205.134.172.28:8333 : Alive: (0.133s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Return Addr=0.0.0.0:8333 Blocks=657615 (Operator: whaack)
watchglass: 192.151.158.26:8333 : Alive: (0.153s) V=70001 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.7.0.1/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 176.9.59.199:8333 : (static.199.59.9.176.clients.your-server.de) Alive: (0.258s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=391683 (Operator: jurov)
watchglass: 84.16.46.130:8333 : (182518.pk.3pp.slovanet.sk) Alive: (0.326s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=431523
watchglass: 185.85.38.54:8333 : (tlapnet-38-54.cust.tlapnet.cz) Alive: (0.353s) V=99999 (/therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/) Jumpers=0x1 (TRB-Compat.) Blocks=657825
watchglass: 185.163.46.29:8333 : Violated BTC Protocol: Bad header length!
cgra: asciilifeform: something about litmus.sh. 1) as peh is an external too, should check externals before calling peh
cgra: 2) i'm comparing litmus.sh to rfc4880, and i fail to get a match: this '
rsa packet' coincides with signature's unhashed sub-packet section when the section is less than 256 bytes long. in part, it's because the
unhashed section length is read as a 1-byte value, and yields 0 (the high byte).
cgra: per rfc4880, unhashed sub-packet section length should be 2 bytes, not 1. and so far i couldn't figure out what 'rsa packet' could mean here. litmus.sh appears to work as long as signature's unhashed sub-packet section is shorter than 256 bytes
cgra: i walked through 'ffa_w_borrow_expr.kv.vpatch.asciilifeform.sig' byte by byte, and also stared at 'pgpdump -il <sigfile>' of the same file
cgra: well, pgpdump says the unhashed sub-section contains one item "issuer key id". but litmus labels this unhashed sub-section "rsa packet", which doesn't parse in my head
cgra: asciilifeform: do you mean it's safe to assume "unhashed sub-packet" section will always be <256 bytes?
cgra: right. do you still think the 'rsa packet' is a proper label for the section?
cgra: ok, i see. and inspecting more of gpg 1.4.x droppings would explain the current wording better?
cgra: can you give an example? example i mentioned, is not so
cgra: in 'ffa_w_borrow_expr.kv.vpatch.asciilifeform.sig' the 'rsa packet' coincides with a unhashed sub-packet section. the two hash bytes and a signature section comes after that
snsabot: Logged on 2020-11-20 10:31:55 asciilifeform: cgra: litmus
discards the 'key id' piece
cgra: yes, and i'm arguing: by accident
cgra: litmus attempts to skip the unhashed section, per one byte, the high byte of the actual size field. so it ends up skipping 0 bytes. actual length is <256, so the high byte is 0
cgra: and from then on, just happens to align. 'rsa packet' helps in this accidental alignment, but it remains a mystery to me, why this piece exists in the code
cgra: asciilifeform: easiest way to check this is print in the litmus code the supposed skip length
cgra: because: unhashed sub section is almost always(?) <255 bytes long
snsabot: Logged on 2020-11-20 10:26:15 asciilifeform: the 2-byte packet length does not actually seem to occur in any signed material in asciilifeform's archive. hence not encountered this discrepancy.
snsabot: Logged on 2020-11-20 10:28:26 cgra: i walked through 'ffa_w_borrow_expr.kv.vpatch.asciilifeform.sig' byte by byte, and also stared at 'pgpdump -il <sigfile>' of the same file
cgra: asciilifeform: it aligns, because you have this 'rsa packet' to cover up the lack of skip. it reads the remaining byte of the two-byte length field and finishes the skip job
cgra: this 'rsa packet' isn't used either, just another skip
cgra: yeah, had a giggle staring at it after initial confusion
cgra: well, with rfc on the side at least
snsabot: (alethepedia) 2020-11-20 billymg: thimbronion: was curious about the OS after reading this article
https://archive.is/u7aWQ (says that the new machines will ONLY boot on the latest version of macOS, so was wondering if that also applied to non-apple operating systems)
cgra: gpg generates multiple keys,
cgra: primary and sign/encrypt key separately, apparently at minimum. but those peh conversion samples have only one key, the primary key
cgra: and primary key apparently suffices for signing, even though gpg has this separate 'signing and encryption key'
cgra: asciilifeform: is it that you don't have to use separate keys with gpg if you don't want to?
cgra: this would mean to me that i could make a long-term key already, only if i can stuff it down gpg's throat for the short term
cgra: asciilifeform: what did you have in mind re public exponent, for ffa keygen?
cgra: exact same process as p and q?
cgra: is my assumption correct that private exponent is a function of those, so in theory can replace d later if didn't generate optimally?
cgra: (meant also that d = private exponent)
cgra: yeah, meant exclusively private exponent, and got the answer
cgra: well, asked a q of both, and fully answered :)
cgra: i wonder if gpg will choke on a large e
cgra: hmm, ok, then i guess it's back to mid-term gen plan