I was rewarded for a comment in the meeting today* with an action item to
start a discussion on-list. So here I am with that. It's difficult (for me
anyway) to articulate some of this in writing, which is why I wanted to
voice it in the meeting. But that got redirected back to the list so here's
my attempt :)

Basically my suggestion is/was that the JWP/JWA/JPT drafts should focus
only on container formats and support for the newer cryptographic
techniques, like BBS, that can provide both selective disclosure and
unlinkability. And not try to do something with "traditional" cryptography
and JWS that can only do selective disclosure. From my perspective it'd be
preferable to have the overall JWP container/abstraction provide a more
consistent set of security/privacy properties that doesn't vary by the
algorithm (that kind of variance has been a problem in JWS, for example,
where the same container can be asymmetrically signed, HMAC'd or not
protected at all). And I think it'd be good to have the general design be
unencumbered by considerations trying to retrofit or account for the
"legacy" stuff. The documents could be simplified (or at least made shorter
and more focused) too by removing the "Single Use JWP" concept that uses
multiple JWS values as well as the MAC JPA stuff.


* which did also refer back to similar comments from the BoF @ IETF 114
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/Qde04x9VqmhGavrlg2Gm_H54Zcc/

-- 
_CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged 
material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, 
distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately 
by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your 
computer. Thank you._
_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

Reply via email to