diff --git a/book/source/09-verification.md b/book/source/09-verification.md index d458144..f2a5ec4 100644 --- a/book/source/09-verification.md +++ b/book/source/09-verification.md @@ -139,6 +139,12 @@ For example, the latest direct-key signature could list "SHA512, SHA384" as hash For yet another User-ID "Bobby", the self-signature could list no hash algorithm preferences at all. If the user wants to compose a signed message using the associated OpenPGP key, they need to figure out, which preferences to use. The specification recommends, that implementations decide which signature takes precendence by the way the certificate is "addressed". + +```{figure} drawio/narrow-interpretation.png + +Preferrences are sourced from different component signatures, depending on how the key is addressed. +``` + If the user wants to write an email as "Bob", it should consider the signature on "Bob", so SHA256 should be used as hash algorithm. If instead the user wants to write as "Bobby", the impementation should inspect the self-certification on "Bobby" instead. However, since this signature does not carry any hash algorithm preferences subpacket, the implementation must fall back to the direct-key signature instead. diff --git a/book/source/drawio/narrow-interpretation.drawio b/book/source/drawio/narrow-interpretation.drawio new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8a32531 --- /dev/null +++ b/book/source/drawio/narrow-interpretation.drawio @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + diff --git a/book/source/drawio/narrow-interpretation.png b/book/source/drawio/narrow-interpretation.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..0eb3520 Binary files /dev/null and b/book/source/drawio/narrow-interpretation.png differ