> -----Original Message-----
> From: jose [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anders Rundgren
> Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 11:16 AM
> To: Richard Barnes
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [jose] JOSE.Next - Clear-Text Signatures?
> 
> On 2014-12-20 18:33, Richard Barnes wrote:
>  > Clear-text signing requires c14n or some other representation-fixing.
>  > If you have proposals for at least one of those, this may be viable.
> 
> As mentioned in the "prospectus" there are multiple ways ahead.  Some kind
> of canonicalization scheme is undoubtedly one of them.
> 
>  > Relying on implementation quirks is not OK.
> 
> My specific proposal does not build on implementation quirks but on an
> explicitly required serialization method which doesn't "scramble" data.
> This may or may not be supported by the target JSON parser.  Since JSON
> parsers usually are pretty simple I don't see this as a insurmountable
obstacle:
> https://openkeystore.googlecode.com/svn/resources/trunk/docs/jcs.html#Int
> eroperability

Based on a quick scan of this, all we need to do is to define a new parser,
a new data format (need to keep both the original text and the value for
some types) and a new serializer and we are home free.

I don't think that is a viable proposal.

Jim


> 
> Targeting the lowest common denominator is the governing standards
> strategy.
> IMO, this [often] thwarts innovation and creates lousy systems so I don't
care
> :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> Anders
> 
> 
> >
> > --Richard
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Anders Rundgren
> <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi List,
> >     In theory JOSE is done since we have key containers, as well as
signature
> and encryption constructs.
> >
> >     In reality it is not because the topic I raised a long time ago
namely the
> ability to sign clear-text
> >     JSON data in a similar fashion like in XML DSig simply isn't going
away:  No,
> it is not only yours
> >     truly who is into JSON clear-text signing although it seems that
everybody
> is dealing with this
> >     issue in quite different ways.  This may actually only be good since
then
> there are some
> >     real-world (tested) schemes to select from.  AFAICT they all have
(even
> including my own take
> >     on the subject...), clearly identifiable pros and cons.
> >
> >     The rationale is simple: Documentation, Validation, Development and
> Debugging of
> >     complex JSON messages becomes easier if the content is provided in
> clear.
> >
> >     There could be justification for IETF taking on such a work-item.
> >
> >     Anders
> >
> >     _________________________________________________
> >     jose mailing list
> >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/jose
> > <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

Reply via email to