> On Jun 30, 2023, at 12:15 PM, Ilari Liusvaara <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 06:32:42PM +0000, lgl island-resort.com wrote:
>> Still trying to keep this to objective facts and not express any opinion of 
>> mine.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 30, 2023, at 10:53 AM, Ilari Liusvaara <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Yes, one can also do ECDH as follows:
>>> 
>>> * COSE_Encrypt bulk alg, e.g. AES-GCM
>>> * COSE_Recipient alg, e,g, A128KW
>>> * ECDH alg, e.g., ECDH-ES + SHA256
>>> * Curve which comes from the key, e.g. NIST P-256
>>> 
>>> 3 algs, plus key subtype...
>> 
>> Yes, that is described in Appendix B of RFC 9052, but ECDH-ES + A128KW
>> (-29) is a short-cut for it. There’s no point in using that particular
>> 3-layer structure.
> 
> What about using a stronger key? All the integrated key wraps have
> SHA-256 KDF, which fails to reach nominal strength of stronger key
> exchange (even if I can not come up with an attack).

Then you define a new aggregate algorithm ID or use the 3-layer structure. 
That’s kind of a future speculative thing that you can always bring up. I don’t 
think it changes the factual summary that I’m trying to establish.


>> I also would say that there is no kind of vector, tuple, array or map
>> in COSE or JOSE that is akin to “hkc”. There is nothing in to COSE or
>> JOSE that does the kind of disaggregation in “hkc”. COSE-HPKE had to
>> invent a new structure for it.
> 
> COSE-HPKE did not need to invent "hkc". COSE-HPKE itself is defined by
> draft-ietf-cose-hpke which does not mention "hkc". The COSE-HPKE
> prototype code I have written does not support "hkc" at all.
> 
> "hkc" only appears in the HPKE keys draft, where the only place where
> it is not optional is using it for subtyping hpke keys, which I think
> is a very bad idea (and mixes really badly with key fingerprints
> draft).
> 
> And "hkc" is a new kind of capability, so it is not surprising that
> there is nothing like that currently in COSE nor JOSE.

I was sloppy with my terminology. I should have said HPKE_sender_info.

You got me on the technicallity here, but the factual summary I’m after is 
still pretty much accurate if you substiute HPKE_sender_info for “hkc”. Right?

I will try to send out a corrected summary soon.  Maybe I’ll include foot notes 
crediing individuals that caught all my errors.

LL



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

Reply via email to