In regards to this issue, we were also notified that the MD API using gcry_md_setkey() can be used to calculate HMACs and it does not have the needed input key length limitation. From the discussion here I read that we would like to keep the internal usage still available so my proposal would be to to add similar check as in gcry_mac_setkey() into the above function. Together with the revert, it is available in the following merge request:

without this list we don't have an option to keep file descriptors open; its not just stderr but for example log files and descriptors which pare passed by other meands than libassuan functions.

PS
The problem is also active, if I send an encryptet (not signed) message to myself.
If I get mails from other people, wich are encryptet using smime and the same certtificate and signed by the sender, there is no problem. GpgOL works fine here.

In T6039#164435, @gniibe wrote:

I read the document (SP 800-131Ar2) again. I think that it would be irrelevant for PKDF2, because it's password KDF, not deriving additional keys from a Cryptographic Key.

• assuan_pipe_connect and internal _assuan_spawn

Are you sure you are using SSH user certificates for SSH authentication? I have trouble with SSH certificate authentication instead of public-key authentication.

The latter. Detecting mail addresses with regexp is anyway a kludge and we have more stringent code to detect mail addresses in a user-id.

I am using this many years now without any problems. Also my collegues and many other folks I know. Thus the question is how your system differs from commonly used systems.

I have tried the stable version (2.3.8). Sadly, it doesn't work. 'agent refused operation' again. And I think it may have nothing to do with OpenSSH certificates because NIST256&384&512 keys do work in this situation.

@werner i'm not sure i understand what "easy to enclose them in angle brackets just for comparison" means.

I read the document (SP 800-131Ar2) again. I think that it would be irrelevant for PKDF2, because it's password KDF, not deriving additional keys from a Cryptographic Key.

We do not support OpenSSH certificates but ignore such requests. However, the keys from the certificates will be imported correctly. You should use the stable version of GnuPG (2.3.8) and not the LTS version 2.,2.

This causes ACVP tests to fail, so apparently the assumption that passphrases must be at least 14 bytes was incorrect. ACVP testing tests values larger than 8 bytes. I'll try to clarify whether that's a limit we need to enforce, or just what NIST wants to test. In any case, we will probably have to revert this.

This is the first report we have on such a problem despite of hundred thousands of users. "Triage" means that we need to look at a report to check its priority.

@werner , why set to "needs triage"? At this moment plugin must be disabled if customer read crypted SMIME E-Mails. So it is critical. disable checkbox "SMIME" will not work correct. Enable "SMIME" will only encrypt as Text, but some E-Mails have HTML.
We have this issue on all systems (Windows 10 and Windows 11)

Please note that: libgcrypt offers ECDH functionality by gcry_pk_encrypt/gcry_pk_decrypt to construct OpenPGP public-key encryption/decryption.

So, this is only for OAEP but not for ECDH? FWIW, GnUPG uses OAEP only for S/MIME.

It's not that needed, in my opinion, as nobody actually uses ECB itself (in real use case). But I understand the point of (possibly, students') benchmarking.

FWIW: I am not anymore very convinced of our tofu code. it leaks too many information because it tracks and stored all signature verification. The model is further way too complicated and the SQL used will eventually lead to a resource problem. Maybe doing Tofu stuff in the frontend is a better idea and get rid of all the history processing which works only for fresh mails and not for data verification.

Yes it is set to tofu+pgp. Is it now possible to change the trust-model on context based?

Thanks for the report, since you are using it on the command line and it works I assume that trust-model is set to tofu+pgp? Because in the Test code there is no context flag for tofu+pgp trust model.

Thanks for the report, since you are using it on the command line and it works I assume that trust-model is set to tofu+pgp? Because in the Test code there is no context flag for tofu+pgp trust model.

I tend to close this as a duplicate.