IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> Mon, 15 April 2013 15:23 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
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 6525721F93B2 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:23:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 amP3givuBO1q for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2lp0207.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.207]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B8521F90D5 for <jose@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BY2FFO11FD002.protection.gbl (10.1.15.202) by BY2FFO11HUB019.protection.gbl (10.1.14.178) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.664.0; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:23:34 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MLTC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.37) by BY2FFO11FD002.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.1.14.124) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.675.0 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:23:34 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.224]) by TK5EX14MLTC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.180]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.003; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:22:44 +0000
From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "odonoghue@isoc.org" <odonoghue@isoc.org>
Thread-Topic: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #12: Should the x5c field be removed from JWE?, ,
Thread-Index: AQHONxCexXvwFe7nYkCTqSJ8uBDKI5jSIMoAgAJpdQCAAt47MA==
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:22:44 +0000
Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394367641257@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <51674E58.6000505@isoc.org> <CE8995AB5D178F44A2154F5C9A97CAF402553CF16251@HE111541.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <4E289D7B-BB53-412A-AE3F-8CD08E45205A@adm.umu.se>
In-Reply-To: <4E289D7B-BB53-412A-AE3F-8CD08E45205A@adm.umu.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.35]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.37; CTRY:US; IPV:CAL; IPV:NLI; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(5383001)(199002)(189002)(13464002)(377454001)(15202345002)(65816001)(69226001)(20776003)(81542001)(47776003)(47446002)(81342001)(55846006)(63696002)(80022001)(66066001)(50466001)(50986001)(47976001)(4396001)(49866001)(16406001)(59766001)(77982001)(46406003)(79102001)(56776001)(47736001)(74662001)(54316002)(51856001)(23726002)(74502001)(31966008)(5343655001)(76482001)(33656001)(44976003)(56816002)(54356001)(46102001)(53806001)(42413001); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2FFO11HUB019; H:TK5EX14MLTC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:InfoDomainNonexistent; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.onmicrosoft.com
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0817737FD1
Cc: "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.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: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:23:38 -0000

1.  Retain the "x5c" header parameter in JWE.

-----Original Message-----
From: jose-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roland Hedberg
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 12:22 PM
To: Axel.Nennker@telekom.de
Cc: jose@ietf.org; odonoghue@isoc.org
Subject: Re: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #12: Should the x5c field be removed from JWE?, , 

+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

_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
jose@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email