Re: [jose] #24: Move JWS headers into signature block

["jose issue tracker" <[e-mail]>]

#24: Move JWS headers into signature block


Comment (by [e-mail]):

 The problem with this proposal is that it makes the structure of the
 headers for the JWS and JWE JSON Serializations no longer parallel.
 Having unnecessary differences between the two can only confuse developers
 and hurt interoperability.

 We decided at the interim meeting in Denver not to have per-recipient
 protected headers and so that's what's in the -11 specs.  It therefore
 doesn't make a lot of sense to add them to the JWS Compact Serialization
 when there are cryptographic reasons that they can't be added to the JWE
 Compact Serialization in the general case (as discussed at length!).

 Also, having shared protected and unprotected header locations in the JWS
 Compact Serialization means that if all signatures are doing something in
 common, such as using the same algorithm, they can represent this in one
 place, rather than being forced to replicate the information for each
 signature.  This capability is already there in the JWE JSON
 Serialization.  Let's not then remove it for JWS.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  [e-mail]   |       Owner:  draft-ietf-jose-json-web-
     Type:  defect       |  [e-mail]
 Priority:  major        |      Status:  new
Component:  json-web-    |   Milestone:
  signature              |     Version:
 Severity:  -            |  Resolution:
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/24#comment:1>
jose <http://tools.ietf.org/jose/>