Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JSON signatures
Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> Thu, 29 October 2015 13:09 UTC
Return-Path: <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9BF1A1B6B for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 dgQP7AlfkSK4 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com (mail-wm0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72D4D1A1B67 for <jose@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wmff134 with SMTP id f134so24659446wmf.0 for <jose@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JHpRa/m8ln6UnZyRlbGipOg+Op28xaKFaUA8reyzf3A=; b=IbK93/8ywWjfBzu3hCapiaInv2g6YmZ7YOZQ/cJkBHrVXLApD+35ZMZfKeyNDOVPEG 0keB76k/kuoYMhnnjwiKtweRwhtaoEMh3KEF3aa5lVowOqwZUvgVc1naHktxpjmakXA7 p4WLZGrl627YTPjJK02zeoHoJPfZ5qlHWcTTJOD901XBM8J7YlLEbtEKNdo5LjDF62P8 qSCN0ohVets8rH017Ejx/bLXF1lPBVhTngt6DBryO43oix+nce2Hs1AmWr+QAh9Y+TxU fWCGO7PxiJWs2FDSSOD//2unqOTefqrSl418tZ9paXNXuUO4SIjc5/5DzBHVACdyEv1k KE+w==
X-Received: by 10.28.16.132 with SMTP id 126mr6326498wmq.86.1446124175017; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.79] (148.198.130.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.130.198.148]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id l186sm9142421wmg.19.2015.10.29.06.09.33 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:09:34 -0700 (PDT)
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>, jose@ietf.org
References: <5631BF2A.70109@gmail.com> <007201d1123f$a68579e0$f3906da0$@augustcellars.com>
From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56321A87.7020105@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:09:27 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <007201d1123f$a68579e0$f3906da0$@augustcellars.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/8sWl6kcplKgadROLXCeuqriuJbo>
Subject: Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JSON signatures
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:09:38 -0000
On 2015-10-29 12:47, Jim Schaad wrote: > Is there any reason to believe that other JSON libraries are going to > implement the ES6 standard? For example, what should one expect either a > hand rolled version or a C# version do? I can only speak for myself. I'm currently upgrading my Java-tools to support ES6 number serialization. The rest already supports a superset of ES6 (with respect to JSON processing NB). Anyway, since JavaScript is the mother of JSON, it seems logical that the off-springs adapt as well :-) Anders > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jose [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anders Rundgren >> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 11:40 PM >> To: jose@ietf.org >> Subject: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JSON signatures >> >> ES6-compliant in-object JS/JSON signature: >> >> var inObjectSignedData = >> { >> // Object data expressed as JS properties >> "device": "Pump2", >> "value": 1e-18, >> >> // Object signature >> "signature": { >> ...Protected headers + Signature value expressed as JS > properties... >> } >> }; >> >> JavaScript's JSON.parse() and JSON.stringify() suffice for > "canonicalization" >> purposes. >> >> >> Converting the above to JWS JSON Serialization you would get: >> >> var signedData = >> { >> // Object data in a coded format >> "payload":"<payload contents>", >> >> // Protected headers wrapped in Base64URL >> "protected":"<integrity-protected header contents>", >> >> // Signature in a unique format >> "signature":"<signature contents>" >> } >> >> ES6 was released in June 2015 so this opportunity is actually quite new. >> >> Cheers, >> Anders >> >> > http://webpki.org/ietf/draft-rundgren-predictable-serialization-for-json-too > ls- >> 00.html#rfc.section.3.3 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jose mailing list >> jose@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose >
- [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JSON s… Anders Rundgren
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Mike Jones
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Mike Jones
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Anders Rundgren
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Mark Watson
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Anders Rundgren
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Jim Schaad
- Re: [jose] At a glance: JWS vs "in-object" ES6/JS… Anders Rundgren