IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #12: Should the x5c field be removed from JWE?, ,

Roland Hedberg <roland.hedberg@adm.umu.se> Sat, 13 April 2013 19:22 UTC

Return-Path: <roland.hedberg@adm.umu.se>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543A921F8E6E for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:22:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HkPK3mjOo3TM for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.ad.umu.se (umdac-ch2.ad.umu.se [130.239.1.247]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F67421F8E6D for <jose@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from UMDAC-CCR1.ad.umu.se ([169.254.1.121]) by UMDAC-CH2.ad.umu.se ([130.239.1.247]) with mapi; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:21:32 +0200
From: Roland Hedberg <roland.hedberg@adm.umu.se>
To: "Axel.Nennker@telekom.de" <Axel.Nennker@telekom.de>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:22:08 +0200
Thread-Topic: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #12: Should the x5c field be removed from JWE?, ,
Thread-Index: Ac44fBsxmCQD++o1QbWrNL68mMR05A==
Message-ID: <4E289D7B-BB53-412A-AE3F-8CD08E45205A@adm.umu.se>
References: <51674E58.6000505@isoc.org> <CE8995AB5D178F44A2154F5C9A97CAF402553CF16251@HE111541.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE8995AB5D178F44A2154F5C9A97CAF402553CF16251@HE111541.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, sv-SE
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, sv-SE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>, "odonoghue@isoc.org" <odonoghue@isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #12: Should the x5c field be removed from JWE?, ,
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Javascript Object Signing and Encryption <jose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jose>
List-Post: <mailto:jose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 19:22:09 -0000

+1

12 apr 2013 kl. 08:32 skrev Axel.Nennker@telekom.de:

> 1
>  
> x5c is the most explicit way to describe which private key is the right one. It is an alternative to kid which is another reason why  kid must not be mandatory.
>  
> From: jose-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Karen O'Donoghue
> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 1:59 AM
> To: jose@ietf.org
> Subject: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #12: Should the x5c field be removed from JWE?, ,
>  
> Issue #12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/12 suggests removing the “x5c” header parameter from JWE, saying that no use case for it has emerged.  The same logic may apply to other key specification parameters for JWE.
> 
> 
> Which of these best describes your preferences on this issue?
> 1.  Retain the “x5c” header parameter in JWE.
> 2.  Remove the “x5c” header parameter (and possibly other related key specification parameters) from JWE.
> 3.  Another resolution (please specify in detail).
> 0.  I need more information to decide.
>  
> Your reply is requested by Friday, April 19th or earlier.
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> jose@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email