Internet DRAFT - draft-dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli
draft-dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli
openpgp D. K. Gillmor
Internet-Draft ACLU
Intended status: Informational 10 March 2023
Expires: 11 September 2023
Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface
draft-dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli-06
Abstract
This document defines a generic stateless command-line interface for
dealing with OpenPGP messages, known as sop. It aims for a minimal,
well-structured API covering OpenPGP object security.
About This Document
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
The latest revision of this draft can be found at
https://dkg.gitlab.io/openpgp-stateless-cli/. Status information for
this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli/.
Discussion of this document takes place on the OpenPGP Working Group
mailing list (mailto:openpgp@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/. Subscribe at
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://gitlab.com/dkg/openpgp-stateless-cli/.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 11 September 2023.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3. Using sop in a Test Suite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4. Semantics vs. Wire Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Subcommands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. version: Version Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. list-profiles: Describe Available Profiles . . . . . . . 8
3.3. generate-key: Generate a Secret Key . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.4. extract-cert: Extract a Certificate from a Secret Key . . 9
3.5. sign: Create Detached Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.6. verify: Verify Detached Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.7. encrypt: Encrypt a Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.8. decrypt: Decrypt a Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.8.1. Historic Options for sop decrypt . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.9. armor: Convert Binary to ASCII . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.10. dearmor: Convert ASCII to Binary . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.11. inline-detach: Split Signatures from an Inline-Signed
Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.12. inline-verify: Verify an Inline-Signed Message . . . . . 20
3.13. inline-sign: Create an Inline-Signed Message . . . . . . 21
4. Input String Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.1. DATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.2. USERID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.3. SUBCOMMAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.4. PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5. Input/Output Indirect Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.1. Special Designators for Indirect Types . . . . . . . . . 24
5.2. CERTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.3. KEYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.4. CIPHERTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
5.5. INLINESIGNED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.6. SIGNATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.7. SESSIONKEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.8. MICALG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.9. PASSWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.10. VERIFICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.11. DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.12. PROFILELIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6. Failure Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7. Known Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8. Alternate Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
9. Guidance for Implementers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
9.1. One OpenPGP Message at a Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
9.2. Simplified Subset of OpenPGP Message . . . . . . . . . . 33
9.3. Validate Signatures Only from Known Signers . . . . . . . 33
9.4. OpenPGP Inputs can be either Binary or ASCII-armored . . 34
9.5. Complexities of the Cleartext Signature Framework . . . . 35
9.6. Reliance on Supplied Certs and Keys . . . . . . . . . . . 36
9.7. Text is always UTF-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
9.8. Passwords are Human-Readable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
9.8.1. Generating Material with Human-Readable Passwords . . 37
9.8.2. Consuming Password-protected Material . . . . . . . . 37
9.9. Be Careful with Special Designators . . . . . . . . . . . 38
10. Guidance for Consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
10.1. Choosing Between --as=text and --as=binary . . . . . . . 39
10.2. Special Designators and Unusual Filenames . . . . . . . 39
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
11.1. Signature Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
11.2. Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
12. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
12.1. Object Security vs. Transport Security . . . . . . . . . 41
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Appendix B. Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Appendix C. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
C.1. Substantive Changes between -05 and -06: . . . . . . . . 45
C.2. Substantive Changes between -04 and -05: . . . . . . . . 45
C.3. Substantive Changes between -03 and -04: . . . . . . . . 45
C.4. Substantive Changes between -02 and -03: . . . . . . . . 45
C.5. Substantive Changes between -01 and -02: . . . . . . . . 46
C.6. Substantive Changes between -00 and -01: . . . . . . . . 46
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
1. Introduction
Different OpenPGP implementations have many different requirements,
which typically break down in two main categories: key/certificate
management and object security.
The purpose of this document is to provide a "stateless" interface
that primarily handles the object security side of things, and
assumes that secret key management and certificate management will be
handled some other way.
Isolating object security from key/certificate management should make
it easier to provide interoperability testing for the object security
side of OpenPGP implementations, as described in Section 1.3.
This document defines a generic stateless command-line interface for
dealing with OpenPGP messages, known here by the placeholder sop. It
aims for a minimal, well-structured API.
An OpenPGP implementation should not name its executable sop to
implement this specification. It just needs to provide a program
that conforms to this interface.
A sop implementation should leave no trace on the system, and its
behavior should not be affected by anything other than command-line
arguments and input.
Obviously, the user will need to manage their secret keys (and their
peers' certificates) somehow, but the goal of this interface is to
separate out that task from the task of interacting with OpenPGP
messages.
While this document identifies a command-line interface, the rough
outlines of this interface should also be amenable to relatively
straightforward library implementations in different languages.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
1.2. Terminology
This document uses the term "key" to refer exclusively to OpenPGP
Transferable Secret Keys (see Section 11.2 of [RFC4880]).
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
It uses the term "certificate" to refer to OpenPGP Transferable
Public Key (see Section 11.1 of [RFC4880]).
"Stateless" in "Stateless OpenPGP" means avoiding secret key and
certificate state. The user is responsible for managing all OpenPGP
certificates and secret keys themselves, and passing them to sop as
needed. The user should also not be concerned that any state could
affect the underlying operations.
OpenPGP revocations can have "Reason for Revocation"
(Section 5.2.3.23 of [RFC4880]), which can be either "soft" or
"hard". The set of "soft" reasons is: "Key is superseded" and "Key
is retired and no longer used". All other reasons (and revocations
that do not state a reason) are "hard" revocations.
1.3. Using sop in a Test Suite
If an OpenPGP implementation provides a sop interface, it can be used
to test interoperability (e.g.,
[OpenPGP-Interoperability-Test-Suite]).
Such an interop test suite can, for example, use custom code (_not_
sop) to generate a new OpenPGP object that incorporates new
primitives, and feed that object to a stable of sop implementations,
to determine whether those implementations can consume the new form.
Or, the test suite can drive each sop implementation with a simple
input, and observe which cryptographic primitives each implementation
chooses to use as it produces output.
1.4. Semantics vs. Wire Format
The semantics of sop are deliberately simple and very high-level
compared to the vast complexity and nuance available within the
OpenPGP specification. This reflects the perspective of nearly every
piece of tooling that relies on OpenPGP to accomplish its task: most
toolchains don't care about the specifics, they just want the high-
level object security properties.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
Given this framing, this document generally tries to avoid
overconstraining the details of the wire format objects emitted, or
what kinds of wire format structures should be acceptable or
unacceptable. This allows a test suite to evaluate and contrast the
wire format choices made by different implementations in as close to
their native configuration as possible. It also makes it easier to
promote interoperability by ensuring that the native wire formats
emitted by one implementation can be consumed by another, without
relying on their choices of wire format being constrained by this
draft.
Where this draft does identify specific wire format requirements,
that might be due to an ambiguity in the existing specifications
(which maybe needs fixing elsewhere), or to a bug in this
specification that could be improved.
2. Examples
These examples show no error checking, but give a flavor of how sop
might be used in practice from a shell.
The key and certificate files described in them (e.g. alice.sec)
could be for example those found in
[I-D.draft-bre-openpgp-samples-01].
sop generate-key "Alice Lovelace <alice@openpgp.example>" > alice.sec
sop extract-cert < alice.sec > alice.pgp
sop generate-key "Bob Babbage <bob@openpgp.example>" > bob.sec
sop extract-cert < bob.sec > bob.pgp
sop sign --as=text alice.sec < statement.txt > statement.txt.asc
sop verify statement.txt.asc alice.pgp < statement.txt
sop encrypt --sign-with=alice.sec bob.pgp < msg.eml > ciphertext.asc
sop decrypt bob.sec < ciphertext.asc > cleartext.eml
See Section 6 for more information about errors and error handling.
3. Subcommands
sop uses a subcommand interface, similar to those popularized by
systems like git and svn.
If the user supplies a subcommand that sop does not implement, it
fails with UNSUPPORTED_SUBCOMMAND. If a sop implementation does not
handle a supplied option for a given subcommand, it fails with
UNSUPPORTED_OPTION.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
All subcommands that produce OpenPGP material on standard output
produce ASCII-armored (Section 6 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]) objects by default (except for
sop dearmor). These subcommands have a --no-armor option, which
causes them to produce binary OpenPGP material instead.
All subcommands that accept OpenPGP material on input should be able
to accept either ASCII-armored or binary inputs (see Section 9.4) and
behave accordingly.
See Section 5 for details about how various forms of OpenPGP material
are expected to be structured.
3.1. version: Version Information
sop version [--backend|--extended|--sop-spec]
* Standard Input: ignored
* Standard Output: version information
This subcommand emits version information as UTF-8-encoded text.
With no arguments, the version string emitted should contain the name
of the sop implementation, followed by a single space, followed by
the version number. A sop implementation should use a version number
that respects an established standard that is easily comparable and
parsable, like [SEMVER].
If --backend is supplied, the implementation should produce a
comparable line of implementation and version information about the
primary underlying OpenPGP toolkit.
If --extended is supplied, the implementation may emit multiple lines
of version information. The first line MUST match the information
produced by a simple invocation, but the rest of the text has no
defined structure.
If --sop-spec is supplied, the implementation should emit a single
line of text indicating the latest version of this draft that it
targets, for example, draft-dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli-06. If the
implementation targets a specific draft but the implementer knows the
implementation is incomplete, it should prefix the draft title with a
"~" (TILDE, U+007E), for example: ~draft-dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli-
06. The implementation MAY emit additional text about its
relationship to the targeted draft on the lines following the
versioned title.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
--backend, --extended, and --sop-spec are mutually-exclusive options.
Example:
$ sop version
ExampleSop 0.2.1
$ sop version --backend
LibExamplePGP 3.4.2
$ sop version --extended
ExampleSop 0.2.1
Running on MonkeyScript 4.5
LibExamplePGP 3.4.2
LibExampleCrypto 3.1.1
LibXCompression 4.0.2
See https://pgp.example/sop/ for more information
$ sop version --sop-spec
~draft-dkg-openpgp-stateless-cli-06
This implementation does not handle @FD: special designators for output.
$
3.2. list-profiles: Describe Available Profiles
sop list-profiles SUBCOMMAND
* Standard Input: ignored
* Standard Output: PROFILELIST (Section 5.12)
This subcommand emits a list of profiles supported by the identified
subcommand.
If the indicated SUBCOMMAND does not accept a --profile option, it
returns UNSUPPORTED_PROFILE.
Example:
$ sop list-profiles generate-key
default: use the implementer's recommendations
rfc4880: use algorithms from RFC 4880
$
3.3. generate-key: Generate a Secret Key
sop generate-key [--no-armor]
[--with-key-password=PASSWORD]
[--profile=PROFILE]
[--] [USERID...]
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* Standard Input: ignored
* Standard Output: KEYS (Section 5.3)
Generate a single default OpenPGP key with zero or more User IDs.
The generated secret key SHOULD be usable for as much of the sop
functionality as possible. In particular:
* It should be possible to extract an OpenPGP certificate from the
key in KEYS with sop extract-cert.
* The key in KEYS should be able to create signatures (with sop
sign) that are verifiable by using sop verify with the extracted
certificate.
* The key in KEYS should be able to decrypt messages (with sop
decrypt) that are encrypted by using sop encrypt with the
extracted certificate.
The detailed internal structure of the certificate is left to the
discretion of the sop implementation.
If the --with-key-password option is supplied, the generated key will
be password-protected (locked) with the supplied password. Note that
PASSWORD is an indirect data type from which the actual password is
acquired (Section 5). See also the guidance on ensuring that the
password is human-readable in Section 9.8.1.
If the --profile argument is supplied and the indicated PROFILE is
not supported by the implementation, sop will fail with
UNSUPPORTED_PROFILE.
If no --with-key-password option is supplied, the generated key will
be unencrypted.
Example:
$ sop generate-key 'Alice Lovelace <alice@openpgp.example>' > alice.sec
$ head -n1 < alice.sec
-----BEGIN PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK-----
$
3.4. extract-cert: Extract a Certificate from a Secret Key
sop extract-cert [--no-armor]
* Standard Input: KEYS (Section 5.3)
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* Standard Output: CERTS (Section 5.2)
The output should contain one OpenPGP certificate in CERTS per
OpenPGP Transferable Secret Key found in KEYS. There is no guarantee
what order the CERTS will be in.
sop extract-cert SHOULD work even if any of the keys in KEYS is
password-protected.
Example:
$ sop extract-cert < alice.sec > alice.pgp
$ head -n1 < alice.pgp
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
$
3.5. sign: Create Detached Signatures
sop sign [--no-armor] [--micalg-out=MICALG]
[--with-key-password=PASSWORD...]
[--as={binary|text}] [--] KEYS [KEYS...]
* Standard Input: DATA (Section 5.11)
* Standard Output: SIGNATURES (Section 5.6)
Exactly one signature will be made by each key in the supplied KEYS
arguments.
--as defaults to binary. If --as=text and the input DATA is not
valid UTF-8 (Section 9.7), sop sign fails with EXPECTED_TEXT.
--as=binary SHOULD result in OpenPGP signatures of type 0x00
("Signature of a binary document"). --as=text SHOULD result in
OpenPGP signatures of type 0x01 ("Signature of a canonical text
document"). See Section 5.2.1 of [RFC4880] for more details.
When generating PGP/MIME messages ([RFC3156]), it is useful to know
what digest algorithm was used for the generated signature. When --
micalg-out is supplied, sop sign emits the digest algorithm used to
the specified MICALG file in a way that can be used to populate the
micalg parameter for the Content-Type (see Section 5.8). If the
specified MICALG file already exists in the filesystem, sop sign will
fail with OUTPUT_EXISTS.
When signing with multiple keys, sop sign SHOULD use the same digest
algorithm for every signature generated in a single run, unless there
is some internal constraint on the KEYS objects. If --micalg-out is
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
requested, and multiple incompatibly-constrained KEYS objects are
supplied, sop sign MUST emit the empty string to the designated
MICALG.
If the signing key material in any key in the KEYS objects is
password-protected, sop sign SHOULD try all supplied --with-key-
password options to unlock the key material until it finds one that
enables the use of the key for signing. If none of the PASSWORD
options unlock the key (or if no such option is supplied), sop sign
will fail with KEY_IS_PROTECTED. Note that PASSWORD is an indirect
data type from which the actual password is acquired (Section 5).
Note also the guidance for retrying variants of a non-human-readable
password in Section 9.8.2.
If any key in the KEYS objects is not capable of producing a
signature, sop sign will fail with KEY_CANNOT_SIGN.
sop sign MUST NOT produce any extra signatures beyond those from KEYS
objects supplied on the command line.
Example:
$ sop sign --as=text alice.sec < message.txt > message.txt.asc
$ head -n1 < message.txt.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
$
3.6. verify: Verify Detached Signatures
sop verify [--not-before=DATE] [--not-after=DATE]
[--] SIGNATURES CERTS [CERTS...]
* Standard Input: DATA (Section 5.11)
* Standard Output: VERIFICATIONS (Section 5.10)
--not-before and --not-after indicate that signatures with dates
outside certain range MUST NOT be considered valid.
--not-before defaults to the beginning of time. Accepts the special
value - to indicate the beginning of time (i.e. no lower boundary).
--not-after defaults to the current system time (now). Accepts the
special value - to indicate the end of time (i.e. no upper boundary).
sop verify only returns OK if at least one certificate included in
any CERTS object made a valid signature in the time window specified
over the DATA supplied.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
For details about the valid signatures, the user MUST inspect the
VERIFICATIONS output.
If no CERTS are supplied, sop verify fails with MISSING_ARG.
If no valid signatures are found, sop verify fails with NO_SIGNATURE.
See Section 11.1 for more details about signature verification.
Example:
(In this example, we see signature verification succeed first, and
then fail on a modified version of the message.)
$ sop verify message.txt.asc alice.pgp < message.txt
2019-10-29T18:36:45Z EB85BB5FA33A75E15E944E63F231550C4F47E38E EB85BB5FA33A75E15E944E63F231550C4F47E38E mode:text signed by alice.pgp
$ echo $?
0
$ tr a-z A-Z < message.txt | sop verify message.txt.asc alice.pgp
$ echo $?
3
$
3.7. encrypt: Encrypt a Message
sop encrypt [--as={binary|text}]
[--no-armor]
[--with-password=PASSWORD...]
[--sign-with=KEYS...]
[--with-key-password=PASSWORD...]
[--profile=PROFILE]
[--] [CERTS...]
* Standard Input: DATA (Section 5.11)
* Standard Output: CIPHERTEXT (Section 5.4)
--as defaults to binary. The setting of --as corresponds to the one
octet format field found in the Literal Data packet at the core of
the output CIPHERTEXT. If --as is set to binary, the octet is b
(0x62). If it is text, the format octet is u (0x75).
--with-password enables symmetric encryption (and can be used
multiple times if multiple passwords are desired).
--sign-with creates exactly one signature by for each secret key
found in the supplied KEYS object (this can also be used multiple
times if signatures from keys found in separaate files are desired).
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
If any key in any supplied KEYS object is not capable of producing a
signature, sop sign will fail with KEY_CANNOT_SIGN. If any signing
key material in any supplied KEYS object is password-protected, sop
encrypt SHOULD try all supplied --with-key-password options to unlock
the key material until it finds one that enables the use of the key
for signing. If none of the --with-key-password=PASSWORD options can
unlock any locked signing key material (or if no such option is
supplied), sop encrypt will fail with KEY_IS_PROTECTED. All
signatures made must be placed inside the encryption produced by sop
encrypt.
Note that both --with-password and --with-key-password supply
PASSWORD arguments, but they do so in different contexts which are
not interchangeable. A PASSWORD supplied for symmetric encryption
(--with-password) MUST NOT be used to try to unlock a signing key (--
with-key-password) and a PASSWORD supplied to unlock a signing key
MUST NOT be used to symmetrically encrypt the message. Regardless of
context, each PASSWORD argument is presented as an indirect data type
from which the actual password is acquired (Section 5). If sop
encrypt encounters a password which is not a valid UTF-8 string
(Section 9.7), or is otherwise not robust in its representation to
humans, it fails with PASSWORD_NOT_HUMAN_READABLE. If sop encrypt
sees trailing whitespace at the end of a password, it will trim the
trailing whitespace before using the password. See Section 9.8 for
more discussion about passwords.
If --as is set to binary, then --sign-with will sign as a binary
document (OpenPGP signature type 0x00).
If --as is set to text, then --sign-with will sign as a canonical
text document (OpenPGP signature type 0x01). In this case, if the
input DATA is not valid UTF-8 (Section 9.7), sop encrypt fails with
EXPECTED_TEXT.
If --sign-with is supplied for input DATA that is not valid UTF-8,
sop encrypt MAY sign as a binary document (OpenPGP signature type
0x00).
sop encrypt MUST NOT produce any extra signatures beyond those from
KEYS objects identified by --sign-with.
The resulting CIPHERTEXT should be decryptable by the secret keys
corresponding to every certificate included in all CERTS, as well as
each password given with --with-password.
If no CERTS or --with-password options are present, sop encrypt fails
with MISSING_ARG.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
If at least one of the identified certificates requires encryption to
an unsupported asymmetric algorithm, sop encrypt fails with
UNSUPPORTED_ASYMMETRIC_ALGO.
If at least one of the identified certificates is not encryption-
capable (e.g., revoked, expired, no encryption-capable flags on
primary key and valid subkeys), sop encrypt fails with
CERT_CANNOT_ENCRYPT.
If the --profile argument is supplied and the indicated PROFILE is
not supported by the implementation, sop will fail with
UNSUPPORTED_PROFILE. The use of a profile for this subcommand allows
an implementation faced with parametric or algorithmic choices to
make a decision coarsely guided by the operator. For example, when
encrypting with a password, there is no knowledge about the
capabilities of the recipient, and an implementation may prefer
cryptographically modern algorithms, or it may prefer more broad
compatibility. In the event that a known recipient (i.e., one of the
CERTS) explicitly indicates a lack of support for one of the features
preferred by the indicated profile, the implementation SHOULD conform
to the recipient's advertised capabilities where possible.
If sop encrypt fails for any reason, it emits no CIPHERTEXT.
Example:
(In this example, bob.bin is a file containing Bob's binary-formatted
OpenPGP certificate. Alice is encrypting a message to both herself
and Bob.)
$ sop encrypt --as=text --sign-with=alice.key alice.asc bob.bin < message.eml > encrypted.asc
$ head -n1 encrypted.asc
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
$
3.8. decrypt: Decrypt a Message
sop decrypt [--session-key-out=SESSIONKEY]
[--with-session-key=SESSIONKEY...]
[--with-password=PASSWORD...]
[--with-key-password=PASSWORD...]
[--verifications-out=VERIFICATIONS
[--verify-with=CERTS...]
[--verify-not-before=DATE]
[--verify-not-after=DATE] ]
[--] [KEYS...]
* Standard Input: CIPHERTEXT (Section 5.4)
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* Standard Output: DATA (Section 5.11)
The caller can ask sop for the session key discovered during
decryption by supplying the --session-key-out option. If the
specified file already exists in the filesystem, sop decrypt will
fail with OUTPUT_EXISTS. When decryption is successful, sop decrypt
writes the discovered session key to the specified file.
--with-session-key enables decryption of the CIPHERTEXT using the
session key directly against the SEIPD packet. This option can be
used multiple times if several possible session keys should be tried.
SESSIONKEY is an indirect data type from which the actual sessionkey
value is acquired (Section 5).
--with-password enables decryption based on any SKESK (Section 5.3 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]) packets in the CIPHERTEXT.
This option can be used multiple times if the user wants to try more
than one password.
--with-key-password lets the user use password-protected (locked)
secret key material. If the decryption-capable secret key material
in any key in the KEYS objects is password-protected, sop decrypt
SHOULD try all supplied --with-key-password options to unlock the key
material until it finds one that enables the use of the key for
decryption. If none of the --with-key-password options unlock the
key (or if no such option is supplied), and the message cannot be
decrypted with any other KEYS, --with-session-key, or --with-password
options, sop decrypt will fail with KEY_IS_PROTECTED.
Note that the two kinds of PASSWORD options are for different
domains: --with-password is for unlocking an SKESK, and --with-key-
password is for unlocking secret key material in KEYS. sop decrypt
SHOULD NOT apply the --with-key-password argument to any SKESK, or
the --with-password argument to any KEYS.
Each PASSWORD argument is an indirect data type from which the actual
password is acquired (Section 5). If sop decrypt tries and fails to
use a password supplied by a PASSWORD, and it observes that there is
trailing UTF-8 whitespace at the end of the password, it will retry
with the trailing whitespace stripped. See Section 9.8.2 for more
discussion about consuming password-protected key material.
--verifications-out produces signature verification status to the
designated file. If the designated file already exists in the
filesystem, sop decrypt will fail with OUTPUT_EXISTS.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
The return code of sop decrypt is not affected by the results of
signature verification. The caller MUST check the returned
VERIFICATIONS to confirm signature status. An empty VERIFICATIONS
output indicates that no valid signatures were found.
--verify-with identifies a set of certificates whose signatures would
be acceptable for signatures over this message.
If the caller is interested in signature verification, both --
verifications-out and at least one --verify-with must be supplied.
If only one of these options is supplied, sop decrypt fails with
INCOMPLETE_VERIFICATION.
--verify-not-before and --verify-not-after provide a date range for
acceptable signatures, by analogy with the options for sop verify
(see Section 3.6). They should only be supplied when doing signature
verification.
See Section 11.1 for more details about signature verification.
If no KEYS or --with-password or --with-session-key options are
present, sop decrypt fails with MISSING_ARG.
If unable to decrypt, sop decrypt fails with CANNOT_DECRYPT.
sop decrypt only emits cleartext to Standard Output that was
successfully decrypted.
Example:
(In this example, Alice stashes and re-uses the session key of an
encrypted message.)
$ sop decrypt --session-key-out=session.key alice.sec < ciphertext.asc > cleartext.out
$ ls -l ciphertext.asc cleartext.out
-rw-r--r-- 1 user user 321 Oct 28 01:34 ciphertext.asc
-rw-r--r-- 1 user user 285 Oct 28 01:34 cleartext.out
$ sop decrypt --with-session-key=session.key < ciphertext.asc > cleartext2.out
$ diff cleartext.out cleartext2.out
$
3.8.1. Historic Options for sop decrypt
The sop decrypt option --verifications-out used to be named --verify-
out. An implementation SHOULD accept either form of this option, and
SHOULD produce a deprecation warning to standard error if the old
form is used.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
3.9. armor: Convert Binary to ASCII
sop armor [--label={auto|sig|key|cert|message}]
* Standard Input: OpenPGP material (SIGNATURES, KEYS, CERTS,
CIPHERTEXT, or INLINESIGNED)
* Standard Output: the same material with ASCII-armoring added, if
not already present
The user can choose to specify the label used in the header and tail
of the armoring.
The default for --label is auto, in which case, sop inspects the
input and chooses the label appropriately, based on the OpenPGP
packets encountered. If the type of the first OpenPGP packet is:
* 0x05 (Secret-Key), the packet stream should be parsed as a KEYS
input (with Armor Header BEGIN PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK).
* 0x06 (Public-Key), the packet stream should be parsed as a CERTS
input (with Armor Header BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK).
* 0x01 (Public-key Encrypted Session Key) or 0x03 (Symmetric-key
Encrypted Session Key), the packet stream should be parsed as a
CIPHERTEXT input (with Armor Header BEGIN PGP MESSAGE).
* 0x04 (One-Pass Signature), the packet stream should be parsed as
an INLINESIGNED input (with Armor Header BEGIN PGP MESSAGE).
* 0x02 (Signature), the packet stream may be either a SIGNATURES
input or an INLINESIGNED input. If the packet stream contains
only Signature packets, it should be parsed as aSIGNATURES input
(with Armor Header BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE). If it contains any
packet other than a Signature packet, it should be parsed as an
INLINESIGNED input (with Armor Header BEGIN PGP MESSAGE).
If the input packet stream does not match the expected sequence of
packet types, sop armor fails with BAD_DATA.
Note that --label=message may be used for either INLINESIGNED or
CIPHERTEXT inputs.
Since sop armor accepts ASCII-armored input as well as binary input,
this operation is idempotent on well-structured data. A caller can
use this subcommand blindly to ensure that any well-formed OpenPGP
packet stream is 7-bit clean.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
FIXME: what to do if the input is a CSF INLINESIGNED message? Three
choices:
* Leave it untouched -- this violates the claim about blindly
ensuring 7-bit clean, since UTF-8-encoded message text is not
necessarily 7-bit clean.
* Convert to ASCII-armored INLINESIGNED -- this requires synthesis
of OPS packet (from the CSF Hash header) and Literal Data packet
(from the message body).
* Raise a specific error.
Example:
$ sop armor < bob.bin > bob.pgp
$ head -n1 bob.pgp
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
$
3.10. dearmor: Convert ASCII to Binary
sop dearmor
* Standard Input: OpenPGP material (SIGNATURES, KEYS, CERTS,
CIPHERTEXT, or INLINESIGNED)
* Standard Output: the same material with any ASCII-armoring removed
If the input packet stream does not match any of the expected
sequence of packet types, sop dearmor fails with BAD_DATA. See also
Section 9.4.
Since sop dearmor accepts binary-formatted input as well as ASCII-
armored input, this operation is idempotent on well-structured data.
A caller can use this subcommand blindly ensure that any well-formed
OpenPGP packet stream is in its standard binary representation.
FIXME: what to do if the input is a CSF INLINESIGNED? Three choices:
* Leave it untouched -- output data is not really in binary format.
* Convert to binary-format INLINESIGNED -- this requires synthesis
of OPS packet (from CSF Hash header) and Literal Data packet (from
the message body).
* Raise a specific error.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
Example:
$ sop dearmor < message.txt.asc > message.txt.sig
$
3.11. inline-detach: Split Signatures from an Inline-Signed Message
sop inline-detach [--no-armor] --signatures-out=SIGNATURES
* Standard Input: INLINESIGNED
* Standard Output: DATA (the message without any signatures)
In some contexts, the user may expect an inline-signed message of
some form or another (INLINESIGNED, see Section 5.5) rather than a
message and its detached signature. sop inline-detach takes such an
inline-signed message on standard input, and splits it into:
* the potentially signed material on standard output, and
* a detached signature block to the destination identified by --
signatures-out
Note that no cryptographic verification of the signatures is done by
this subcommand. Once the inline-signed message is separated,
verification of the detached signature can be done with sop verify.
If no --signatures-out is supplied, sop inline-detach fails with
MISSING_ARG.
Note that there may be more than one Signature packet in an inline-
signed message. All signatures found in the inline-signed message
will be emitted to the --signatures-out destination.
If the inline-signed message uses the Cleartext Signature Framework,
it may be dash-escaped (see Section 7.1 of [RFC4880]). The output of
sop detach-inband-signature-and-message will have any dash-escaping
removed.
If the input is not an INLINESIGNED message, sop inline-detach fails
with BAD_DATA. If the input contains more than one object that could
be interpreted as an INLINESIGNED message, sop inline-detach also
fails with BAD_DATA. A sop implementation MAY accept (and discard)
leading and trailing data when the incoming INLINESIGNED message uses
the Cleartext Signature Framework.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
If the file designated by --signatures-out already exists in the
filesystem, sop detach-inband-signature-and-message will fail with
OUTPUT_EXISTS.
Note that --no-armor here governs the data written to the --
signatures-out destination. Standard output is always the raw
message, not an OpenPGP packet.
Example:
$ sop inline-detach --signatures-out=Release.pgp < InRelease >Release
$ sop verify Release.pgp archive-keyring.pgp < Release
$
3.12. inline-verify: Verify an Inline-Signed Message
sop inline-verify [--not-before=DATE] [--not-after=DATE]
[--verifications-out=VERIFICATIONS]
[--] CERTS [CERTS...]
* Standard Input: INLINESIGNED (Section 5.5)
* Standard Output: DATA (Section 5.11)
This command is similar to sop verify (Section 3.6) except that it
takes an INLINESIGNED message (see Section 5.5) and produces the
message body (without signatures) on standard output. It is also
similar to sop inline-detach (Section 3.11) except that it actually
performs signature verification.
--not-before and --not-after indicate that signatures with dates
outside certain range MUST NOT be considered valid.
--not-before defaults to the beginning of time. Accepts the special
value - to indicate the beginning of time (i.e. no lower boundary).
--not-after defaults to the current system time (now). Accepts the
special value - to indicate the end of time (i.e. no upper boundary).
sop inline-verify only returns OK if INLINESIGNED contains at least
one valid signature made during the time window specified by a
certificate included in any CERTS object.
For details about the valid signatures, the user MUST inspect the
VERIFICATIONS output.
If no CERTS are supplied, sop inline-verify fails with MISSING_ARG.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
If no valid signatures are found, sop inline-verify fails with
NO_SIGNATURE and emits nothing on standard output.
See Section 11.1 for more details about signature verification.
Example:
(In this example, we see signature verification succeed first, and
then fail on a modified version of the message.)
$ sop inline-verify -- alice.pgp < message.txt
Hello, world!
$ echo $?
0
$ sed s/Hello/Goodbye/ < message.txt | sop inline-verify -- alice.pgp
$ echo $?
3
$
3.13. inline-sign: Create an Inline-Signed Message
sop inline-sign [--no-armor]
[--with-key-password=PASSWORD...]
[--as={binary|text|clearsigned}]
[--] KEYS [KEYS...]
* Standard Input: DATA (Section 5.11)
* Standard Output: INLINESIGNED (Section 5.5)
Exactly one signature will be made by each key in the supplied KEYS
arguments.
The generated output stream will be an inline-signed message, by
default producing an OpenPGP "Signed Message" packet stream.
--as defaults to binary. If --as= is set to either text or
clearsigned, and the input DATA is not valid UTF-8 (Section 9.7), sop
inline-sign fails with EXPECTED_TEXT.
--as=binary SHOULD result in OpenPGP signatures of type 0x00
("Signature of a binary document"). --as=text SHOULD result in an
OpenPGP signature of type 0x01 ("Signature of a canonical text
document"). See Section 5.2.1 of [RFC4880] for more details.
--as=clearsigned SHOULD behave the same way as --as=text except that
it produces an output stream using the Cleartext Signature Framework
(see Section 7 of [RFC4880] and Section 9.5).
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
If both --no-armor and --as=clearsigned are supplied, sop inline-sign
fails with INCOMPATIBLE_OPTIONS.
If the signing key material in any key in the KEYS objects is
password-protected, sop inline-sign SHOULD try all supplied --with-
key-password options to unlock the key material until it finds one
that enables the use of the key for signing. If none of the PASSWORD
options unlock the key (or if no such option is supplied), sop
inline-sign will fail with KEY_IS_PROTECTED. Note that PASSWORD is
an indirect data type from which the actual password is acquired
(Section 5). Note also the guidance for retrying variants of a non-
human-readable password in Section 9.8.2.
If any key in the KEYS objects is not capable of producing a
signature, sop inline-sign will fail with KEY_CANNOT_SIGN.
sop inline-sign MUST NOT produce any extra signatures beyond those
from KEYS objects supplied on the command line.
Example:
$ sop inline-sign --as=clearsigned alice.sec < message.txt > message-signed.txt
$ head -n5 < message-signed.txt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
This is the message.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
$
4. Input String Types
Some material is passed to sop directly as a string on the command
line.
4.1. DATE
An ISO-8601 formatted timestamp with time zone, or the special value
now to indicate the current system time.
Examples:
* now
* 2019-10-29T12:11:04+00:00
* 2019-10-24T23:48:29Z
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* 20191029T121104Z
In some cases where used to specify lower and upper boundaries, a
DATE value can be set to - to indicate "no time limit".
A flexible implementation of sop MAY accept date inputs in other
unambiguous forms.
Note that whenever sop emits a timestamp (e.g. in Section 5.10) it
MUST produce only a UTC-based ISO-8601 compliant representation with
a resolution of one second, using the literal Z suffix to indicate
timezone.
4.2. USERID
This is an arbitrary UTF-8 string (Section 9.7). By convention, most
User IDs are of the form Display Name <email.address@example.com>,
but they do not need to be.
4.3. SUBCOMMAND
This is an ASCII string that matches the name of one of the
subcommands listed in Section 3.
4.4. PROFILE
Some sop subcommands can accept a --profile option, which takes as an
argument the name of a profile.
A profile name is a UTF-8 string that has no whitespace in it.
Which profiles are available depends on the sop implementation.
Similar to OpenPGP Notation names, profile names are divided into two
namespaces: the IETF namespace and the user namespace. A profile
name in the user namespace ends with the @ character (0x40) followed
by a DNS domain name. A profile name in the IETF namespace does not
have an @ character.
A profile name in the user space is owned and controlled by the owner
of the domain in the suffix. A sop implementation that implements a
user profile but does not own the domain in question SHOULD hew as
closely as possible to the semantics described by the owner of the
domain.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
A profile name in the IETF namespace that begins with the string rfc
should have semantics that hew as closely as possible to the
referenced RFC. Similarly, a profile name in the IETF namespace that
begins with the string draft- should have semantics that hew as
closely as possible to the referenced Internet Draft.
The reserved profile name default in the IETF namespace simply refers
to the implementation's default choices.
Note that this profile mechanism is intended to provide a limited way
for an implementation to select among a small set of options that the
implementer has vetted and is satisfied with. It is not intended to
provide an arbitrary channel for complex configuration, and a sop
implementation MUST NOT use it in that way.
5. Input/Output Indirect Types
Some material is passed to sop indirectly, typically by referring to
a filename containing the data in question. This type of data may
also be passed to sop on Standard Input, or delivered by sop to
Standard Output.
If any input data is specified explicitly to be read from a file that
does not exist, sop will fail with MISSING_INPUT.
If any input data does not meet the requirements described below, sop
will fail with BAD_DATA.
5.1. Special Designators for Indirect Types
An indirect argument or parameter that starts with "@" (COMMERCIAL
AT, U+0040) is not treated as a filename, but is reserved for special
handling, based on the prefix that follows the @. We describe two of
those prefixes (@ENV: and @FD:) here. A sop implementation that
receives such a special designator but does not know how to handle a
given prefix in that context MUST fail with
UNSUPPORTED_SPECIAL_PREFIX.
If the filename for any indirect material used as input has the
special form @ENV:xxx, then contents of environment variable $xxx is
used instead of looking in the filesystem. @ENV is for input only: if
the prefix @ENV: is used for any output argument, sop fails with
UNSUPPORTED_SPECIAL_PREFIX.
If the filename for any indirect material used as either input or
output has the special form @FD:nnn where nnn is a decimal integer,
then the associated data is read from file descriptor nnn.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
See Section 9.9 for more details about safe handling of these special
designators.
5.2. CERTS
One or more OpenPGP certificates (Section 11.1 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]), aka "Transferable Public Key".
May be armored (see Section 9.4).
Although some existing workflows may prefer to use one CERTS object
with multiple certificates in it (a "keyring"), supplying exactly one
certificate per CERTS input will make error reporting clearer and
easier.
5.3. KEYS
One or more OpenPGP Transferable Secret Keys (Section 11.2 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]). May be armored (see
Section 9.4).
Secret key material is often locked with a password to ensure that it
cannot be simply copied and reused. If any secret key material is
locked with a password and no --with-key-password option is supplied,
sop may fail with error KEY_IS_PROTECTED. However, when a cleartext
secret key (that is, one not locked with a password) is available,
sop should always be able to use it, whether a --with-key-password
option is supplied or not.
Although some existing workflows may prefer to use one KEYS object
with multiple keys in it (a "secret keyring"), supplying exactly one
key per KEYS input will make error reporting clearer and easier.
5.4. CIPHERTEXT
sop accepts only a restricted subset of the arbitrarily-nested
grammar allowed by the OpenPGP Messages definition (Section 11.3 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]).
In particular, it accepts and generates only:
An OpenPGP message, consisting of a sequence of PKESKs (Section 5.1
of [I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]) and SKESKs (Section 5.3 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]), followed by one SEIPD
(Section 5.13 of [I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]).
The SEIPD can decrypt into one of two things:
* "Maybe Signed Data" (see below), or
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* Compressed data packet that contains "Maybe Signed Data"
"Maybe Signed Data" is a sequence of:
* N (zero or more) one-pass signature packets, followed by
* zero or more signature packets, followed by
* one Literal data packet, followed by
* N signature packets (corresponding to the outer one-pass
signatures packets)
FIXME: does any tool do compression inside signing? Do we need to
handle that?
May be armored (see Section 9.4).
5.5. INLINESIGNED
An inline-signed message may take any one of three different forms:
* A binary sequence of OpenPGP packets that matches a subset of the
"Signed Message" element in the grammar in Section 11.3 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]
* The same sequence of packets, but ASCII-armored (see Section 9.4)
* A message using the Cleartext Signature Framework described in
Section 7 of [I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]
The subset of the packet grammar expected in the first two forms
consists of either:
* a series of Signature packets followed by a Literal Data packet
* a series of One-Pass Signature (OPS) packets, followed by one
Literal Data packet, followed by an equal number of Signature
packets corresponding to the OPS packets
When the message is in the third form (Cleartext Signature
Framework), it has the following properties:
* The stream SHOULD consist solely of UTF-8 text
* Every Signature packet found in the stream SHOULD have Signature
Type 0x01 (canonical text document).
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* It SHOULD NOT contain leading text (before the -----BEGIN PGP
SIGNED MESSAGE----- cleartext header) or trailing text (after the
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- armor tail).
While some OpenPGP implementations MAY produce more complicated
inline signed messages, a sop implementation SHOULD limit itself to
producing these straightforward forms.
5.6. SIGNATURES
One or more OpenPGP Signature packets. May be armored (see
Section 9.4).
5.7. SESSIONKEY
This documentation uses the GnuPG defacto ASCII representation:
ALGONUM:HEXKEY
where ALGONUM is the decimal value associated with the OpenPGP
Symmetric Key Algorithms (Section 9.3 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]) and HEXKEY is the hexadecimal
representation of the binary key.
Example AES-256 session key:
9:FCA4BEAF687F48059CACC14FB019125CD57392BAB7037C707835925CBF9F7BCD
A sop implementation SHOULD produce session key data in this format.
When consuming such a session key, sop SHOULD be willing to accept
either upper or lower case hexadecimal digits, and to gracefully
ignore any trailing whitespace.
5.8. MICALG
This output-only type indicates the cryptographic digest used when
making a signature. It is useful specifically when generating signed
PGP/MIME objects, which want a micalg= parameter for the multipart/
signed content type as described in Section 5 of [RFC3156].
It will typically be a string like pgp-sha512, but in some situations
(multiple signatures using different digests) it will be the empty
string. If the user of sop is assembling a PGP/MIME signed object,
and the MICALG output is the empty string, the user should omit the
micalg= parameter entirely.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
5.9. PASSWORD
This input-only is expected to be a UTF-8 string (Section 9.7), but
for sop decrypt, any bytestring that the user supplies will be
accepted. Note the details in sop encrypt and sop decrypt about
trailing whitespace!
See also Section 9.8 for more discussion.
5.10. VERIFICATIONS
This output-only type consists of one line per successful signature
verification. Each line has three structured fields delimited by a
single space, followed by arbitrary text to the end of the line that
forms a message describing the verification.
* ISO-8601 UTC datestamp of the signature, to one second precision,
using the Z suffix
* Fingerprint of the signing key (may be a subkey)
* Fingerprint of primary key of signing certificate (if signed by
primary key, same as the previous field)
* (optional) a string describing the mode of the signature, either
mode:text or mode:binary
* message describing the verification (free form)
Note that while Section 4.1 permits a sop implementation to accept
other unambiguous date representations, its date output here MUST be
a strict ISO-8601 UTC date timestamp. In particular:
* the date and time fields MUST be separated by T, not by
whitespace, since whitespace is used as a delimiter
* the time MUST be emitted in UTC, with the explicit suffix Z
* the time MUST be emitted with one-second precision
Example:
2019-10-24T23:48:29Z C90E6D36200A1B922A1509E77618196529AE5FF8 C4BC2DDB38CCE96485EBE9C2F20691179038E5C6 mode:binary certificate from dkg.asc
5.11. DATA
Cleartext, arbitrary data. This is either a bytestream or UTF-8
text.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
It MUST only be UTF-8 text in the case of input supplied to sop sign
--as=text or sop encrypt --as=text. If sop receives DATA containing
non-UTF-8 octets in this case, it will fail (see Section 9.7) with
EXPECTED_TEXT.
5.12. PROFILELIST
This output-only type consists of simple UTF-8 textual output, with
one line per profile. Each line consists of the profile name
optionally followed by a colon (0x31), a space (0x20), and a brief
human-readable description of the intended semantics of the profile.
Each line may be at most 1000 bytes, and no more than 4 profiles may
be listed.
These limits are intended to force sop implementers to make hard
decisions and to keep things simple.
The first profile MAY be explicitly named default. If it is not
named default, then default is an alias for the first profile listed.
No profile after the first listed may be named default.
See Section 4.4 for more discussion about the namespace and intended
semantics of each profile.
6. Failure Modes
sop return codes have both mnemonics and numeric values.
When sop succeeds, it will return 0 (OK) and emit nothing to Standard
Error. When sop fails, it fails with a non-zero return code, and
emits one or more warning messages on Standard Error. Known return
codes include:
+=======+=============================+============================+
| Value | Mnemonic | Meaning |
+=======+=============================+============================+
| 0 | OK | Success |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 3 | NO_SIGNATURE | No acceptable signatures |
| | | found (sop verify) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 13 | UNSUPPORTED_ASYMMETRIC_ALGO | Asymmetric algorithm |
| | | unsupported (sop encrypt) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 17 | CERT_CANNOT_ENCRYPT | Certificate not |
| | | encryption-capable (e.g., |
| | | expired, revoked, |
| | | unacceptable usage flags) |
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
| | | (sop encrypt) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 19 | MISSING_ARG | Missing required argument |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 23 | INCOMPLETE_VERIFICATION | Incomplete verification |
| | | instructions (sop decrypt) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 29 | CANNOT_DECRYPT | Unable to decrypt (sop |
| | | decrypt) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 31 | PASSWORD_NOT_HUMAN_READABLE | Non-UTF-8 or otherwise |
| | | unreliable password (sop |
| | | encrypt, sop generate-key) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 37 | UNSUPPORTED_OPTION | Unsupported option |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 41 | BAD_DATA | Invalid data type (no |
| | | secret key where KEYS |
| | | expected, etc) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 53 | EXPECTED_TEXT | Non-text input where text |
| | | expected |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 59 | OUTPUT_EXISTS | Output file already exists |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 61 | MISSING_INPUT | Input file does not exist |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 67 | KEY_IS_PROTECTED | A KEYS input is password- |
| | | protected (locked), and |
| | | sop cannot unlock it with |
| | | any of the --with-key- |
| | | password options |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 69 | UNSUPPORTED_SUBCOMMAND | Unsupported subcommand |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 71 | UNSUPPORTED_SPECIAL_PREFIX | An indirect parameter is a |
| | | special designator (it |
| | | starts with @) but sop |
| | | does not know how to |
| | | handle the prefix |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 73 | AMBIGUOUS_INPUT | A indirect input parameter |
| | | is a special designator |
| | | (it starts with @), and a |
| | | filename matching the |
| | | designator is actually |
| | | present |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
| 79 | KEY_CANNOT_SIGN | Key not signature-capable |
| | | (e.g., expired, revoked, |
| | | unacceptable usage flags) |
| | | (sop sign and sop encrypt |
| | | with --sign-with) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 83 | INCOMPATIBLE_OPTIONS | Options were supplied that |
| | | are incompatible with each |
| | | other |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 89 | UNSUPPORTED_PROFILE | The requested profile is |
| | | unsupported (sop generate- |
| | | key, sop encrypt), or the |
| | | indicated subcommand does |
| | | not accept profiles (sop |
| | | list-profiles) |
+-------+-----------------------------+----------------------------+
Table 1: Error return codes
If a sop implementation fails in some way not contemplated by this
document, it MAY return any non-zero error code, not only those
listed above.
7. Known Implementations
The following implementations are known at the time of this draft:
+==========+=============================================================+===========+===========+
|Project |URL |cli name |notes |
|name | | | |
+==========+=============================================================+===========+===========+
|Sequoia |https://gitlab.com/sequoia-pgp/sequoia-sop |sqop |Implemented|
|SOP | | |in Rust |
| | | |using the |
| | | |sequoia- |
| | | |openpgp |
| | | |crate |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|gosop |https://github.com/ProtonMail/gosop |gosop |Implemented|
| | | |in golang |
| | | |(Go) using |
| | | |GOpenPGP |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|PGPainless|https://codeberg.org/PGPainless/pgpainless/src/branch/master/|pgpainless-|Implemented|
|SOP |pgpainless-sop |cli |in Java |
| | | |using |
| | | |PGPainless |
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|sopgpy |https://gitlab.com/sequoia-pgp/openpgp-interoperability-test-|sopgpy |Implemented|
| |suite/-/blob/main/glue/sopgpy | |in Python |
| | | |using PGPy |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|sop- |https://github.com/openpgpjs/sop-openpgpjs |sop-openpgp|Implemented|
|openpgp.js| | |in |
| | | |JavaScript |
| | | |using |
| | | |OpenPGP.js |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|gpgme-sop |https://gitlab.com/sequoia-pgp/gpgme-sop |gpgme-sop |A Rust |
| | | |wrapper |
| | | |around the |
| | | |gpgme C |
| | | |library |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|RNP-sop |https://gitlab.com/sequoia-pgp/rnp-sop |rnp-sop |A Rust |
| | | |wrapper |
| | | |around the |
| | | |librnp C |
| | | |library |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
|dkg-sop |https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/dkgpg.git/tree/tools/ |dkg-sop |Implemented|
| |dkg-sop.cc | |in C++ |
| | | |using the |
| | | |LibTMCG |
| | | |library |
+----------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
Table 2: Known implementations
8. Alternate Interfaces
This draft primarily defines a command line interface, but future
versions may try to outline a comparable idiomatic interface for C or
some other widely-used programming language.
Comparable idiomatic interfaces are already active in the wild for
different programming languages, in particular:
* Rust: [RUST-SOP]
* Java: [SOP-JAVA]
* Python: [PYTHON-SOP]
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
These programmatic interfaces are typically coupled with a wrapper
that can automatically generate a command-line tool compatible with
this draft.
An implementation that uses one of these languages should target the
corresponding idiomatic interface for ease of development and
interoperability.
9. Guidance for Implementers
sop uses a few assumptions that implementers might want to consider.
9.1. One OpenPGP Message at a Time
sop is intended to be a simple tool that operates on one OpenPGP
object at a time. It should be composable, if you want to use it to
deal with multiple OpenPGP objects.
FIXME: discuss what this means for streaming. The stdio interface
doesn't necessarily imply streamed output.
9.2. Simplified Subset of OpenPGP Message
While the formal grammar for OpenPGP Message is arbitrarily nestable,
sop constrains itself to what it sees as a single "layer" (see
Section 5.4).
This is a deliberate choice, because it is what most consumers
expect. Also, if an arbitrarily-nested structure is parsed with a
recursive algorithm, this risks a denial of service vulnerability.
sop intends to be implementable with a parser that defensively
declines to do recursive descent into an OpenPGP Message.
Note that an implementation of sop decrypt MAY choose to handle more
complex structures, but if it does, it should document the other
structures it handles and why it chooses to do so. We can use such
documentation to improve future versions of this spec.
9.3. Validate Signatures Only from Known Signers
There are generally only a few signers who are relevant for a given
OpenPGP message. When verifying signatures, sop expects that the
caller can identify those relevant signers ahead of time.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
9.4. OpenPGP Inputs can be either Binary or ASCII-armored
OpenPGP material on input can be in either ASCII-armored or binary
form. This is a deliberate choice because there are typical
scenarios where the program can't predict which form will appear.
Expecting the caller of sop to detect the form and adjust accordingly
seems both redundant and error-prone.
The simple way to detect possible ASCII-armoring is to see whether
the high bit of the first octet is set: Section 4.2 of [RFC4880]
indicates that bit 7 is always one in the first octet of an OpenPGP
packet. In standard ASCII-armor, the first character is "-" (HYPHEN-
MINUS, U+002D), so the high bit should be cleared.
When considering an input as ASCII-armored OpenPGP material, sop MAY
reject an input based on any of the following variations (see
Section 6.2 of [RFC4880] for precise definitions):
* An unknown Armor Header Line
* Any text before the Armor Header Line
* Malformed lines in the Armor Headers section
* Any non-whitespace data after the Armor Tail
* Any Radix-64 encoded line with more than 76 characters
* Invalid characters in the Radix-64-encoded data
* An invalid Armor Checksum
* A mismatch between the Armor Header Line and the Armor Tail
For robustness, sop SHOULD be willing to ignore whitespace after the
Armor Tail.
When considering OpenPGP material as input, regardless of whether it
is ASCII-armored or binary, sop SHOULD reject any material that
doesn't produce a valid stream of OpenPGP packets. For example, sop
SHOULD raise an error if an OpenPGP packet header is malformed, or if
there is trailing garbage after the end of a packet.
For a given type of OpenPGP input material (i.e., SIGNATURES, CERTS,
KEYS, INLINESIGNED, or CIPHERTEXT), sop SHOULD also reject any input
that does not conform to the expected packet stream. See Section 5
for the expected packet stream for different types.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
9.5. Complexities of the Cleartext Signature Framework
sop prefers a detached signature as the baseline form of OpenPGP
signature, but provides affordances for dealing with inline-signed
messages (see INLINESIGNED, Section 5.5) as well.
The most complex form of inline-signed messages is the Cleartext
Signature Framework (CSF). Handling the CSF structure requires
parsing to delimit the multiple parts of the document, including at
least:
* any preamble before the message
* the inline message header (delimiter line, OpenPGP headers)
* the message itself
* the divider between the message and the signature (including any
OpenPGP headers there)
* the signature
* the divider that terminates the signature
* any suffix after the signature
Note also that the preamble or the suffix might be arbitrary text,
and might themselves contain OpenPGP messages (whether signatures or
otherwise).
If the parser that does this split differs in any way from the parser
that does the verification, or parts of the message are confused, it
would be possible to produce a verification status and an actual
signed message that don't correspond to one another.
Blurred boundary problems like this can produce ugly attacks similar
to those found in [EFAIL].
A user of sop that receives an inline-signed message (whether the
message uses the CSF or not) can detach the signature from the
message with sop inline-detach (see Section 3.11).
Alternately, the user can send the message through sop inline-verify
to confirm required signatures, and then (if signatures are valid)
supply its output to the consumer of the signed message.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
9.6. Reliance on Supplied Certs and Keys
A truly stateless implementation may find that it spends more time
validating the internal consistency of certificates and keys than it
does on the actual object security operations.
For performance reasons, an implementation may choose to ignore
validation on certificate and key material supplied to it. The
security implications of doing so depend on how the certs and keys
are managed outside of sop.
9.7. Text is always UTF-8
Various places in this specification require UTF-8 [RFC3629] when
encoding text. sop implementations SHOULD NOT consider textual data
in any other character encoding.
OpenPGP Implementations MUST already handle UTF-8, because various
parts of [RFC4880] require it, including:
* User ID
* Notation name
* Reason for revocation
* ASCII-armor Comment: header
Dealing with messages in other charsets leads to weird security
failures like [Charset-Switching], especially when the charset
indication is not covered by any sort of cryptographic integrity
check. Restricting textual data to UTF-8 universally across the
OpenPGP ecosystem eliminates any such risk without losing
functionality, since UTF-8 can encode all known characters.
9.8. Passwords are Human-Readable
Passwords are generally expected to be human-readable, as they are
typically recorded and transmitted as human-visible, human-
transferable strings. However, they are used in the OpenPGP protocol
as bytestrings, so it is important to ensure that there is a reliable
bidirectional mapping between strings and bytes. The maximally
robust behavior here is for sop encrypt and sop generate-key (that
is, commands that use a password to encrypt) to constrain the choice
of passwords to strings that have such a mapping, and for sop decrypt
and sop sign (and sop inline-sign, as well assop encrypt when
decrypting a signing key; that is, commands that use a password to
decrypt) to try multiple plausible versions of any password supplied
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
by PASSWORD.
9.8.1. Generating Material with Human-Readable Passwords
When generating material based on a password, sop encrypt and sop
generate-key enforce that the password is actually meaningfully
human-transferable. In particular, an implementation generating
material based on a new paasword SHOULD apply the following
considerations to the supplied password:
* require UTF-8
* trim trailing whitespace
Some sop encrypt and sop generate-key implementations may make even
more strict requirements on input to ensure that they are
transferable between humans in a robust way.
For example, a more strict sop encrypt or sop generate-key MAY also:
* forbid leading whitespace
* forbid non-printing characters other than SPACE (U+0020), such as
ZERO WIDTH NON-JOINER (U+200C) or TAB (U+0009)
* require the password to be in Unicode Normal Form C
([UNICODE-NORMALIZATION])
Violations of these more-strict policies SHOULD result in an error of
PASSWORD_NOT_HUMAN_READABLE.
A sop encrypt or sop generate-key implementation typically SHOULD NOT
attempt enforce a minimum "password strength", but in the event that
some implementation does, it MUST NOT represent a weak password with
PASSWORD_NOT_HUMAN_READABLE.
9.8.2. Consuming Password-protected Material
When sop decrypt receives a PASSWORD input, either from a --with-key-
password or --with-password option, it sees its content as a
bytestring. sop sign also sees the content of any PASSWORD input
supplied to its --with-key-password option as a bytestring. If the
bytestring fails to work as a password, but ends in UTF-8 whitespace,
it will try again with the trailing whitespace removed. This handles
a common pattern of using a file with a final newline, for example.
The pattern here is one of robustness in the face of typical errors
in human-transferred textual data.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
A more robust sop decrypt or sop sign implementation that finds
neither of the above two attempts work for a given PASSWORD MAY try
additional variations if they produce a different bytestring, such
as:
* trimming any leading whitespace, if discovered
* trimming any internal non-printable characters other than SPACE
(U+0020)
* converting the supplied PASSWORD into Unicode Normal Form C
([UNICODE-NORMALIZATION])
A sop decrypt or sop sign implementation that stages multiple
decryption attempts like this SHOULD consider the computational
resources consumed by each attempt, to avoid presenting an attack
surface for resource exhaustion in the face of a non-standard
PASSWORD input.
9.9. Be Careful with Special Designators
As documented in Section 5.1, special designators for indirect inputs
like @ENV: and @FD: (and indirect outputs using @FD:) warrant some
special/cautious handling.
For one thing, it's conceivable that the filesystem could contain a
file with these literal names. If sop receives an indirect output
parameter that starts with an "@" (COMMERCIAL AT, U+0040) it MUST NOT
write to the filesystem for that parameter. A sop implementation
that receives such a parameter as input MAY test for the presence of
such a file in the filesystem and fail with AMBIGUOUS_INPUT to warn
the user of the ambiguity and possible confusion.
These special designators are likely to be used to pass sensitive
data (like secret key material or passwords) so that it doesn't need
to touch the filesystem. Given this sensitivity, sop should be
careful with such an input, and minimize its leakage to other
processes. In particular, sop SHOULD NOT leak any environment
variable identified by @ENV: or file descriptor identified by @FD: to
any subprocess unless the subprocess specifically needs access to
that data.
10. Guidance for Consumers
While sop is originally conceived of as an interface for
interoperability testing, it's conceivable that an application that
uses OpenPGP for object security would want to use it.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
FIXME: more guidance for how to use such a tool safely and
efficiently goes here.
FIXME: if an encrypted OpenPGP message arrives without metadata, it
is difficult to know which signers to consider when decrypting. How
do we do this efficiently without invoking sop decrypt twice, once
without --verify-* and again with the expected identity material?
10.1. Choosing Between --as=text and --as=binary
A program that invokes sop to generate an OpenPGP signature typically
needs to decide whether it is making a text or binary signature.
By default, sop will make a binary signature. The caller of sop sign
should choose --as=text only when it knows that:
* the data being signed is in fact textual, and encoded in UTF-8,
and
* the signed data might be transmitted to the recipient (the
verifier of the signature) over a channel that has the propensity
to transform line-endings.
Examples of such channels include FTP ([RFC0959]) and SMTP
([RFC5321]).
10.2. Special Designators and Unusual Filenames
In some cases, a user of sop might want to pass all the files in a
given directory as positional parameters (e.g., a list of CERTS files
to test a signature against).
If one of the files has a name that starts with --, it might be
confused by sop for an option. If one of the files has a name that
starts with @, it might be confused by sop as a special designator
(Section 5.1).
If the user wants to deliberately refer to such an ambiguously-named
file in the filesystem, they should prefix the filename with ./ or
use an absolute path.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
Any specific @FD: special designator SHOULD NOT be supplied more than
once to an invocation of sop. If a sop invocation sees multiple
copies of a specific @FD:n input (e.g., sop sign @FD:3 @FD:3), it MAY
fail with MISSING_INPUT even if file descriptor 3 contains a valid
KEYS, because the bytestream for the KEYS was consumed by the first
argument. Doubling up on the same @FD: for output (e.g., sop decrypt
--session-key-out=@FD:3 --verifications-out=@FD:3) also results in an
ambiguous data stream.
11. Security Considerations
The OpenPGP object security model is typically used for
confidentiality and authenticity purposes.
11.1. Signature Verification
In many contexts, an OpenPGP signature is verified to prove the
origin and integrity of an underlying object.
When sop checks a signature (e.g. via sop verify or sop decrypt --
verify-with), it MUST NOT consider it to be verified unless all of
these conditions are met:
* The signature must be made by a signing-capable public key that is
present in one of the supplied certificates
* The certificate and signing subkey must have been created before
or at the signature time
* The certificate and signing subkey must not have been expired at
the signature time
* The certificate and signing subkey must not be revoked with a
"hard" revocation
* If the certificate or signing subkey is revoked with a "soft"
revocation, then the signature time must predate the revocation
* The signing subkey must be properly bound to the primary key, and
cross-signed
* The signature (and any dependent signature, such as the cross-sig
or subkey binding signatures) must be made with strong
cryptographic algorithms (e.g., not MD5 or a 1024-bit RSA key)
Implementers MAY also consider other factors in addition to the
origin and authenticity, including application-specific information.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
For example, consider the application domain of checking software
updates. If software package Foo version 13.3.2 was signed on
2019-10-04, and the user receives a copy of Foo version 12.4.8 that
was signed on 2019-10-16, it may be authentic and have a more recent
signature date. But it is not an upgrade (12.4.8 < 13.3.2), and
therefore it should not be applied automatically.
In such cases, it is critical that the application confirms that the
other information verified is _also_ protected by the relevant
OpenPGP signature.
Signature validity is a complex topic (see for example the discussion
at [DISPLAYING-SIGNATURES]), and this documentation cannot list all
possible details.
11.2. Compression
The interface as currently specified does not allow for control of
compression. Compressing and encrypting data that may contain both
attacker-supplied material and sensitive material could leak
information about the sensitive material (see the CRIME attack).
Unless an application knows for sure that no attacker-supplied
material is present in the input, it should not compress during
encryption.
12. Privacy Considerations
Material produced by sop encrypt may be placed on an untrusted
machine (e.g., sent through the public SMTP network). That material
may contain metadata that leaks associational information (e.g.,
recipient identifiers in PKESK packets (Section 5.1 of
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07])). FIXME: document things like
PURBs and --hidden-recipient)
12.1. Object Security vs. Transport Security
OpenPGP offers an object security model, but says little to nothing
about how the secured objects get to the relevant parties.
When sending or receiving OpenPGP material, the implementer should
consider what privacy leakage is implicit with the transport.
13. References
13.1. Normative References
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
[I-D.ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07]
Wouters, P., Huigens, D., Winter, J., and N. Yutaka,
"OpenPGP Message Format", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07, 23 October
2022, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
openpgp-crypto-refresh-07>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC3156] Elkins, M., Del Torto, D., Levien, R., and T. Roessler,
"MIME Security with OpenPGP", RFC 3156,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3156, August 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3156>.
[RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November
2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3629>.
[RFC4880] Callas, J., Donnerhacke, L., Finney, H., Shaw, D., and R.
Thayer, "OpenPGP Message Format", RFC 4880,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4880, November 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4880>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
13.2. Informative References
[Charset-Switching]
Gillmor, D. K., "Inline PGP Considered Harmful", 24
February 2014,
<https://dkg.fifthhorseman.net/notes/inline-pgp-harmful/>.
[DISPLAYING-SIGNATURES]
Brunschwig, P., "On Displaying Signatures", n.d.,
<https://admin.hostpoint.ch/pipermail/enigmail-
users_enigmail.net/2017-November/004683.html>.
[EFAIL] Poddebniak, D. and C. Dresen, "Efail: Breaking S/MIME and
OpenPGP Email Encryption using Exfiltration Channels",
n.d., <https://efail.de>.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
[I-D.draft-bre-openpgp-samples-01]
Einarsson, B. R., "juga", and D. K. Gillmor, "OpenPGP
Example Keys and Certificates", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-bre-openpgp-samples-01, 20 December
2019, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bre-
openpgp-samples-01>.
[OpenPGP-Interoperability-Test-Suite]
"OpenPGP Interoperability Test Suite", 25 October 2021,
<https://tests.sequoia-pgp.org/>.
[PYTHON-SOP]
Gillmor, D., "SOP for python", n.d.,
<https://pypi.org/project/sop/>.
[RFC0959] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol",
STD 9, RFC 959, DOI 10.17487/RFC0959, October 1985,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc959>.
[RFC5321] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 5321,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5321, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5321>.
[RUST-SOP] Winter, J., "A Rust implementation of the Stateless
OpenPGP Protocol", n.d.,
<https://sequoia-pgp.gitlab.io/sop-rs/>.
[SEMVER] Preston-Werner, T., "Semantic Versioning 2.0.0", 18 June
2013, <https://semver.org/>.
[SOP-JAVA] Schaub, P., "Stateless OpenPGP Protocol for Java.", n.d.,
<https://github.com/pgpainless/sop-java>.
[UNICODE-NORMALIZATION]
Whistler, K., "Unicode Normalization Forms", 4 February
2019, <https://unicode.org/reports/tr15/>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
This work was inspired by Justus Winter's
[OpenPGP-Interoperability-Test-Suite].
The following people contributed helpful feedback and considerations
to this draft, but are not responsible for its problems:
* Allan Nordhoey
* Antoine Beaupre
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* Edwin Taylor
* Heiko Schaefer
* Jameson Rollins
* Justus Winter
* Paul Schaub
* Vincent Breitmoser
Appendix B. Future Work
* certificate transformation into popular publication forms:
- WKD
- DANE OPENPGPKEY
- Autocrypt
* sop encrypt -- specify compression? (see Section 11.2)
* sop encrypt -- specify padding policy/mechanism?
* sop decrypt -- how can it more safely handle zip bombs?
* sop decrypt -- what should it do when encountering weakly-
encrypted (or unencrypted) input?
* sop encrypt -- minimize metadata (e.g. --throw-keyids)?
* specify an error if a DATE arrives as input without a time zone?
* add considerations about what it means for armored CERTS to
contain multiple certificates -- multiple armorings? one big
blob?
* do we need an interface or option (for performance?) with the
semantics that sop doesn't validate certificates internally, it
just accepts whatever's given as legit data? (see Section 9.6)
* do we need to be able to convert a message with a text-based
signature to a CSF INLINESIGNED message? I'd rather not, given
the additional complications.
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
Appendix C. Document History
C.1. Substantive Changes between -05 and -06:
* version: add --sop-spec argument
* encrypt: add --profile argument
C.2. Substantive Changes between -04 and -05:
* decrypt: change --verify-out to --verifications-out
* encrypt: add missing --with-key-password
* add the concept of "profiles", use with generate-key
* include table of known implementations
* VERIFICATIONS can now indicate the type of the signature
(mode:text or mode:binary)
C.3. Substantive Changes between -03 and -04:
* Reinforce that PASSWORD and SESSIONKEY are indirect data types
* encrypt: remove --as=mime option
* Handle password-locked secret key material: add --with-key-
password options to generate-key, sign, and decrypt.
* Introduce INLINESIGNED message type (Section 5.5)
* Rename detach-inband-signature-and-message to inline-detach,
clarify its possible inputs
* Add inline-verify
* Add inline-sign
C.4. Substantive Changes between -02 and -03:
* Added --micalg-out parameter to sign
* Change from KEY to KEYS (permit multiple secret keys in each blob)
* New error code: KEY_CANNOT_SIGN
* version now has --backend and --extended options
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
C.5. Substantive Changes between -01 and -02:
* Added mnemonics for return codes
* decrypt should fail when asked to output to a pre-existing file
* Removed superfluous --armor option
* Much more specific about what armor --label=auto should do
* armor and dearmor are now fully idempotent, but work only well-
formed OpenPGP streams
* Dropped armor --allow-nested
* Specified what encrypt --as= means
* New error code: KEY_IS_PROTECTED
* Documented expectations around human-readable, human-transferable
passwords
* New subcommand: detach-inband-signature-and-message
* More specific guidance about special designators like @FD: and
@ENV:, including new error codes UNSUPPORTED_SPECIAL_PREFIX and
AMBIGUOUS_INPUT
C.6. Substantive Changes between -00 and -01:
* Changed generate subcommand to generate-key
* Changed convert subcommand to extract-cert
* Added "Input String Types" section as distinct from indirect I/O
* Made implicit arguments potentially explicit (e.g. sop armor
--label=auto)
* Added --allow-nested to sop armor to make it idempotent by default
* Added fingerprint of signing (sub)key to VERIFICATIONS output
* Dropped --mode and --session-key arguments for sop encrypt (no
plausible use, not needed for interop)
* Added --with-session-key argument to sop decrypt to allow for
session-key-based decryption
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft Stateless OpenPGP Command Line Interface March 2023
* Added examples to each subcommand
* More detailed error codes for sop encrypt
* Move from CERT to CERTS (each CERTS argument might contain
multiple certificates)
Author's Address
Daniel Kahn Gillmor
American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad St.
New York, NY, 10004
United States of America
Email: dkg@fifthhorseman.net
Gillmor Expires 11 September 2023 [Page 47]
