I just had a quick look and it seems fine for
asymmetric keys assuming there's a need for it
and a justification for including things like
'{"e":' in the hash input, which I don't see.

The reason I looked at this is that there's some
overlap here with RFC6920, (I'm an author of
that) and DANE and maybe other specs that say
how to hash a public key.

It does seem a shame to have so many ways to
hash public keys, but 6920 is compatible with
DANE and others that hash a SPKI (even if
that's artificially created just as a hash
input), so I wonder if the benefit of the
running code here is really worth being
different from other specs that hash a SPKI.

So, other than that someone has some code,
what is the benefit of being incompatible with
other specs here?

The downside is that I could not determine
that one of these does/doesn't map to the
same public key as some DANE RRs for example.
Seems a bit odd to me to want to accept that
downside unless there's an upside.

Only other thing is for symmetric keys I think
you should add an optional salt, in case you
need the thumbprint of a low-entropy secret,
which is quite likely to happen, and quite
likely to get exposed somehow. And I'd argue
to recommend that a long salt always be used
for potentially low-entropy secret keys.

Apologies if the WG discussed these before
but I missed it;-)

S.

PS: These are just random-punter comments with
no hats.

On 23/01/15 01:56, Jim Schaad wrote:
> This starts a two week last call on draft-ietf-jose-jwk-thumbprint.  Last
> call will end on February 2, 2015.
> 
>  
> 
> Due to the general lack of activity on the list.  General silence will be
> considered as a vote to park the document and either have it done via the
> ISE or with an AD shepherd rather than having group consensus.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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