Re: PublicKeyFile Format Security Considerations

["Joel N. Weber II" <ietf-secsh%joelweber.com@localhost>]

> So, here's the text as I currently have it, does this work?

It mostly looks fine to me.

> data stored in such files. Given the potential of an adversarial

I believe that should be ``adversary''.

> tampering with this data, system-specific measures (e.g. Access Control Lists, 

[...]

> Home Phone:..."). The presence and use of this header data SHOULD be 
> reviewed by sites that deploy this file format.

RFC 2119 says:

| 3. SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
|    may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
|    particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
|    carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

So to take this excessively literally, it sounds like sites that
aren't going to review the presence and use of this header data must
understand and carefully weigh the full implications of skipping this
review before choosing to not do this review.

It may be that you should just write the word ``should'' without the
capital letters.