Rob:
> 
>>> (3) p 6, sec 5.2.  AES-CBC COSE Algoritm Identifiers
>>> 
>>>  The following table defines the COSE AES-CBC algorithm values.  Note
>>>  that these algorithms are being registered as "Deprecated" to avoid
>>>  accidental use without a companion integrity protection mechanism.
>>> 
>> +=========+=======+==========+========================+=========
>> ====+
>>>  | Name    | Value | Key Size |      Description       | Recommended |
>>> 
>> +=========+=======+==========+========================+=========
>> ====+
>>>  | A128CBC |  TBD4 |   128    |       AES-CBC w/       |  Deprecated |
>>>  |         |       |          |      128-bit key       |             |
>>>  +---------+-------+----------+------------------------+-------------+
>>>  | A192CBC |  TBD5 |   192    |       AES-CBC w/       |  Deprecated |
>>>  |         |       |          |      192-bit key       |             |
>>>  +---------+-------+----------+------------------------+-------------+
>>>  | A256CBC |  TBD6 |   256    |       AES-CBC w/       |  Deprecated |
>>>  |         |       |          |      256-bit key       |             |
>>>  +---------+-------+----------+------------------------+-------------+
>>> 
>>> I wanted to check that "Deprecated" is really the best choice for
>> "Recommended"
>>> for both AES-CTR and AES-CBC.  I read 'deprecated' as meaning that other
>> COSE
>>> algorithms should be used in preference to these, but it wasn't clear that 
>>> is
>>> the intent here.  I note that this column contains some entries with a value
>>> such as "Filter Only", hence wondering it these should be labelled as
>>> "Confidentiality only", perhaps with the description indicating that
>> integrity
>>> must be handled separately?
>> 
>> This was the consensus of the COSE WG since these algorithms do not
>> provide both confidentiality and integrity.
> [Rob Wilton (rwilton)] 
> 
> Presumably these aren't currently used (because they don't have a value 
> assigned), and if users should always use a different protocol in preference 
> (because these are marked as deprecated), then I'm struggling to understand 
> why we are publishing this at all?  Or in summary, I think that the calling 
> them deprecated may cause confusion.

I think the text above the table provides the explanation.  Repeating it:

   The following table defines the COSE AES-CTR algorithm values.  Note
   that these algorithms are being registered as "Deprecated" to avoid
   accidental use without a companion integrity protection mechanism.

The COSE WG felt that "Not Recommendd" was not strong enough.

Russ

_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

Reply via email to