You might need to explain what you mean in greater detail. You say the use of a 
HMAC is ad-hoc and then refer to the concatenation of the secret to the request 
body. Yet, HMAC does not actually define the information format to be exchanged 
(how could it possibly do so?), so simple concatenation seems entirely 
reasonable since it a) fully represents the information both parties are 
exchanging and b) must be defined by the specification to ensure 
interoperability between implementations.

 Pádraic Brady

http://blog.astrumfutura.com
http://www.survivethedeepend.com
OpenID Europe Foundation Irish Representative





________________________________
From: Nick Johnson (Google) <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, October 8, 2009 8:51:56 AM
Subject: [pubsubhubbub] Re: Use of HMAC for authenticated content  distribution

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Sachin Shenoy <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>I am bit confused here. SHA in SHA-1 stands for Secure Hash Algorithm. Why do 
>you say it is ad-hoc?

I'm not saying the hash algorithm itself is ad-hoc, I'm saying its use
as an HMAC is ad-hoc. RFC2104 defines an accepted (and proven secure)
way of constructing an HMAC, which is far preferable to the simple
concatenation approach taken here.

-Nick



>
>If you meant "Why don't we support other hash function [configured/chosen by a 
>param], instead of just supporting SHA-1?" - I think that has to do with this 
>line from spec. 
>http://pubsubhubbub.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/pubsubhubbub-core-0.2.html
>>
>
>
>"To dramatically simplify this spec in several places where we had to choose 
>between supporting A or B, we took it upon ourselves to say "only A", rather 
>than making it an implementation decision."
>
>
>Thanks,
>Sachin
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 2:15 AM, Nick Johnson (Google) 
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>The hubbub spec, in section 7.4, says: 
>>>http://pubsubhubbub.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/pubsubhubbub-core-0.2.html#authednotify
>>
>>"The signature MUST be
>>        computed by appending the hub.secret value
>>        to the request body and then generating the combined string's HMAC 
>> using
>>        the SHA1 algorithm."
>>
>>However,
>>HMAC has a specific definition, in RFC2104, which allows for composing
>>HMACs from secure hash algorithms. It's constructed specifically to
>>make it more difficult to forge or brute-force an HMAC, a property the
>>description in the hubbub spec lacks.
>>
>>Why does the hubbub spec use this ad-hoc construction instead of a proper 
>>HMAC?
>>
>>-- 
>>Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine
>>Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration Number: 
>>368047
>>
>


-- 
Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine
Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration Number: 
368047

Reply via email to