On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Carl Wallace <[email protected]>wrote:
> > From: Richard Barnes <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, October 11, 2013 10:56 AM > To: Russ Housley <[email protected]> > Cc: perpass <[email protected]>, "Moriarty, Kathleen" < > [email protected]> > Subject: Re: [perpass] PKCS#12 needs fix'n > > I would note that the JSON Web Key [1] spec from the JOSE WG provides a > similar, much simpler format than PKCS#12. Just have JWK Set with one > public, unencrypted member, and one encrypted member: > > [ > { "kty": "RSA", "n": "...", "e": "...", "x5c": "..." }, > JWE({ "kty": "RSA", "n": "...", "e": "...", "d": "..." }) > ] > > Since software is going to have to change in any case to use a revised > PKCS#12, I wonder if it might not be a better idea to ditch ASN.1 while > we're at it. > > > I think I see some ASN.1 in your JSON too:-) > X.509 is one thing. PKCS#12 is quite another. Having implemented both (in JavaScript, no less), I can tell you which one caused less pain and got more interop. --Richard
_______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
