t; Subject: Re: [COSE] Recharter the COSE working group.
>
> I also support this effort. The COSE WG already closed, but that shouldn't
> stop
> the proposed COSEbis WG from using this mailing list (and/or hopefully just
> not
> adopting the -bis suffix).
>
> I am cu
I support this recharter activity. The SUIT WG does not want to specify the
use of hash-based signature algorithms with COSE because they have much greater
applicability than just signing software packages. I did write a draft
that could be used as a starting point
for this portion of the
> I do not currently believe that there is a need to define a COSE equivalent
> to the CMS DigestedData structure at this point. Given the potential
> flexibility desired it is probably better to have people do this on an ad hoc
> basis.
I agree completely.
So we only need those numbers.
> -Original Message-
> From: Carsten Bormann
> Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 2:47 PM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: cose
> Subject: Re: [COSE] Recharter the COSE working group.
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> Interesting initiative.
>
> On Aug 11, 2018, at 23:03, Ji
Hi Jim,
Interesting initiative.
On Aug 11, 2018, at 23:03, Jim Schaad wrote:
>
> The W3C Web Authentication working group has identified a need for the
> ability to use algorithms which are currently part of TPMs which are widely
> deployed. Many of the algorithms for this work are not
