Re: Encryption simplification

Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> Mon, 31 October 2016 06:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF0B1294F4 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IIUC5Yp8xZgH for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:18:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD2C129453 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:18:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c15qx-0002ZT-UF for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 06:13:51 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 06:13:51 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c15qx-0002ZT-UF@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <costin@gmail.com>) id 1c15qr-0002X3-PU for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 06:13:45 +0000
Received: from mail-oi0-f45.google.com ([209.85.218.45]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <costin@gmail.com>) id 1c15ql-0007ML-R5 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 06:13:40 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f45.google.com with SMTP id v84so49816532oie.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vF7Fe8w/Bkfe1uclfVzlKSctuASv3n0/3hxR7Vk+J6s=; b=JjnptKdKBg7R7vq/G8RUU2FRN0D8431LmTYN3WLTO0OSjcLtzAPBSCK0opolAIw0Bh l3Lc8KR8SStTgwXRxjwj4baGgdpwLlVH+O45xE0QVDORdiCcKnyKAB/0PonrxPakPTla GgiWDQxn0wCHNIU89iwWKsj33f+TV3Bz7/Tmgey8gsF02aE2IEHLr68Wre2ChJOvxL5w yZhGpSN3PYr/uYeFOSwPVBPwTYZmS8nFHlBlyLKbRE0GMOeW7vPycyBTFVpKa9BsN5lM K/0klHGQw2Qlufwv0xarMCzaVLUu2dnXre4cMoutURzPzBCzDKWQGKOVnjmZTMBMahYi m4AQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vF7Fe8w/Bkfe1uclfVzlKSctuASv3n0/3hxR7Vk+J6s=; b=TP0bQoQDJ+72KejkIEaI/BiM0JgepMqHolIGiSZZ4KRNwnKJkNs8S7WD9cFNrGRhNs 4fuyebMm5g8kiJEEssiYR3kQO729VGb4o9hRZfpe5Xwr23zKUEmhY6gcub5ZFM8Eo9Fj de6a2dGQrfaQsJ3bRa7+vueq5QWuKbp+jLe1pJ96iyggNCb+SClYxIX6c/k7QkfGdOgm bp2HE4Dn8p3gA3j4BrvBCRRKh9tN60jzmXjYlgPaW8jewkcjwgKyFws//INcJf0q8LWr 9E1y9xZ3RNXPPKE3TPICMo1OwdgSN+8UsbzKAUbXhcvHesEHnHPMhah+msjn19Pgu8Lj 4HZg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngveKor/3gGdDUxKSvji4QURnG4h8y4EOfxG03BfqbhyoFU2nL27O3exVGXjSLINcEGfyDpqlMDpeeeyfzQ==
X-Received: by 10.107.16.41 with SMTP id y41mr5351970ioi.211.1477894393206; Sun, 30 Oct 2016 23:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <922b5d40-3c8e-4642-17ec-0034ff841d9d@gmx.de> <20161030182604.36ED312C6B@welho-filter3.welho.com> <CABkgnnUJhvt3NzUOYQ7fq9Twc8K65BtXroQ_LUHbranuqRv0mw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUJhvt3NzUOYQ7fq9Twc8K65BtXroQ_LUHbranuqRv0mw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 06:13:02 +0000
Message-ID: <CAP8-FqneP57fhwQD1eFAw4D=PAe9uhtsjJ_2AqFAkZFTJcBJBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c05438529f990540231a95
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.218.45; envelope-from=costin@gmail.com; helo=mail-oi0-f45.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.350, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1c15ql-0007ML-R5 71ab8b2a70e8ab996623e391e8ae2932
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Encryption simplification
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP8-FqneP57fhwQD1eFAw4D=PAe9uhtsjJ_2AqFAkZFTJcBJBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32747
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

1. Why not add the Crypto-Key to the binary header ? If we have to deal
with binary encoding, we can at
least avoid parsing more text headers - and it doesn't have to be b64.

2. For webpush - if the actual encryption is the same ( and I haven't
compared with the previous version ) - I
don't expect it to be a big problem to accept both formats for a while in
existing servers.
Having all keys in the binary payload has benefits - less parsing/confusion
on the headers, b64 encoding/decoding.
+1

Costin

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 5:01 PM Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

On 31 October 2016 at 05:26, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
wrote:
> I guess that this "id" is keyid:

Yes, thanks for noticing.  Fixed.

> Is that 2^36-1 same than  2^36-31  here:

Again, a typo.  Thanks.