Other protocols use ICV (Integrity Check Value) to avoid this confusion. ICV also avoids the confusion with the many different interpretations of MAC.
Russ On Apr 16, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Richard Barnes wrote: > I'm confused. This is not about the IV == Initialization Vector, it's about > the JWE Integrity Value (inconveniently also "IV"). I don't think anyone has > proposed merging in the initialization vector, both because that's not what > RFC 5116 does and because it's a terrible idea :) > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 2:41 PM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote: > 1 ish. > > Representing the nonce/IV separately should not preclude using a crypto > library generated nonce/IV , as may be done in some libraries implementing > draft-mcgrew-aead-aes-cbc-hmac-sha2. > > So I am in favour of the current serialization while wanting to support the > crypto from draft-mcgrew-aead-aes-cbc-hmac-sha2 if not the particular > serialization which is optimized for a different use-case. The current > draft-mcgrew-aead-aes-cbc-hmac-sha2 conflates crypto and serialization. I am > hoping we can resolve that so the crypto can be supported. > > John B. > > On 2013-04-11, at 8:58 PM, Karen O'Donoghue <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Issue #11 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/11 proposes >> restructuring the JWE representation to remove the JWE Integrity Value field >> and instead use the RFC 5116 (AEAD) binary serialization to represent the >> Ciphertext, Initialization Vector, and Integrity Value values. If this >> proposal is adopted, JWEs would then have three fields – the header, the >> encrypted key, and the RFC 5116 combination of the Ciphertext, >> Initialization Vector, and Integrity Value values. >> This issue is also related to issue #3. Note that the updated McGrew draft >> described there could be used whether or not we switched to using RFC 5116. >> >> >> Which of these best describes your preferences on this issue? >> >> 1. Continue having separate Ciphertext, Initialization Vector, and >> Integrity Value values in the JWE representation. >> >> 2. Switch to using the RFC 5116 (AEAD) serialization to represent the >> combination of these three values. >> >> 3. Another resolution (please specify in detail). >> >> 0. I need more information to decide. >> >> >> Your reply is requested by Friday, April 19th or earlier. >> _______________________________________________ >> jose mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose > > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose > > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
