IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [http-auth] [saag] re-call for IETF http-auth BoF

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 07 June 2011 00:20 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: http-auth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: http-auth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9760F21F84BE for <http-auth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 17:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RbQoKrSShBBO for <http-auth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 17:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scss.tcd.ie (hermes.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.32.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DF6321F845E for <http-auth@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jun 2011 17:20:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8371153D31; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 01:20:26 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:user-agent:from:date:message-id:received :received:x-virus-scanned; s=cs; t=1307406026; bh=lkU/jTYVv9dg+8 tN7lxb6xA8CJ3UE+UqicuqYAdQFLM=; b=4qZ2oH21Q/ZAfOYldA2yG0LeX9TNv+ S85WIGv6Y1W88spQJ+oJDGHrqnYkVuol0w6wgXyxKnNn2JwoCx6vUdT2s3XRXNhG dBOJKjhi2DAgDIab6fQIASk+gVr51Byq7aevfj4FNTgHzbVxdPD7ba5f9PZQx648 tiMNJM83HLf1H1XWmaUS+fZnbiDIrOyTlS3LG3QyVFvVWVU+RlQ9AGeOOOvQ9FfC n+YqXMKnse15unyIIQDuHr6cjylFgpGicM3/8CKZqCLpjseIghYQafFB3ym0b3OY aGmJeBpLT59GUwb59XZzePJXywe7g892zm6uiy3aQ2RZzc6GUHOvcjZQ==
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with ESMTP id FxquTupD2Oti; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 01:20:26 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.3] (unknown [86.46.20.46]) by smtp.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECE2D153D2F; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 01:20:25 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <4DED6EC9.4040300@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 01:20:25 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
References: <878vtgfbs1.fsf@bluewind.rcis.aist.go.jp> <A89D85D0-00AB-4F21-8841-6707E9CDCFC4@gmx.net> <BANLkTind5rg-tOZJ+B2ocD_s=9_-rufH5Q@mail.gmail.com> <4DED55C5.1010306@extendedsubset.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DED55C5.1010306@extendedsubset.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: http-auth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [http-auth] [saag] re-call for IETF http-auth BoF
X-BeenThere: http-auth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: HTTP authentication methods <http-auth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/http-auth>, <mailto:http-auth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/http-auth>
List-Post: <mailto:http-auth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:http-auth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-auth>, <mailto:http-auth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 00:20:37 -0000

Hiya,

On 06/06/11 23:33, Marsh Ray wrote:
> On 06/06/2011 04:44 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
>>  But I'm afraid
>> that the appearance of success will be enough to staunch progress in
>> any other areas, so it may be a now-or-never situation for any
>> alternatives other than JavaScript crypto APIs.
> 
> Don't worry about it, they're not going to work even that well.

Just trying to understand this. Why won't what work well?
(Compared to Tom, Dick and Harry each doing the same thing
in their own favourite way?)

Seriously - I think it'll be useful to know/document the
limitations of this approach of developing a standard
JS crypto API.

S.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email