Re: [jose] Shouldn't Cookbook 4.1 have the "might not be possible to exactly replicate..." text?
Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com> Mon, 04 August 2014 17:27 UTC
Return-Path: <mamille2@cisco.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 9E1381A005C for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 10:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -13.508
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.508 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FS_REPLICA=0.994, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 qqQ_rec7FudN for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 10:27:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1CC51A0019 for <jose@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 10:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1442; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1407173255; x=1408382855; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y+p8iy9JI4IFEWKFIoO0s8sdkhHZEqBaTBKirSKw/20=; b=Qf5UgiIDcjk9QFFk9uVxrbvTgcDrRKvOXJmSFT9A4CSGr/iPwrswHB7G tdXM1Tpel3CKBSD4SSpdYZnSlgyoU0f7W7pcfRlpOH6mgFwzh8zATbSkE f0IBkfndVIE6tbLBCD35kNcGKdgCPfwnvph2wmHp3Zw9uNmVPr/OUAmCc M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoEFAIDB31OtJA2H/2dsb2JhbABagw1SVwSCdKt6AwMFAW4BnEmHTgGBERZ3hAQBAQQjDwFFEQsOCgICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgFFBgEMBgIBAYg+rjGXBxeBLIRQiR06gnmBUgEEiw+Qd4cjjTyCB4FlTYFG
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,799,1400025600"; d="scan'208";a="345001453"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Aug 2014 17:27:35 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com [173.37.183.79]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s74HRZA7032605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 4 Aug 2014 17:27:35 GMT
Received: from [10.129.24.46] (10.129.24.46) by xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (173.37.183.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 12:27:34 -0500
Message-ID: <53DFC288.9000502@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 11:27:36 -0600
From: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>, "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>
References: <CA+k3eCTL4Q=W5BC+FPRrzek1eH6icgf7j3rj=7jNyuO0GbPJXw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+k3eCTL4Q=W5BC+FPRrzek1eH6icgf7j3rj=7jNyuO0GbPJXw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.129.24.46]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/YJBPcajNMx3EBeGc2HXD2uUoMuo
Subject: Re: [jose] Shouldn't Cookbook 4.1 have the "might not be possible to exactly replicate..." text?
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: <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, 04 Aug 2014 17:27:37 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 7/30/14, 2:21 PM, Brian Campbell wrote: > My understanding is that RSAES-PKCS1-v1_5 pads with random bytes > so shouldn't §4.1 "Key Encryption using RSA v1.5 and AES-HMAC-SHA2" > have a note similar to what's been added in other sections that > states that it "might not be possible to exactly replicate the > results in this section..."? My experience with RSA v1.5 has been > that each invocation of it will produce a different the encrypted > key value even for the same CEK (short of doing something funky > with the source of randomness but even then there's not enough info > in the draft to recreate the exact same results). > Good catch; I'll add it to my working copy. - -- - - m&m Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com > Cisco Systems, Inc. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJT38KIAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO1A/cIALNboGQDsposQ0dpiG6oM/rA ZUJRYZsYx23nFT+sFVduAeU8r0G2XGjRCz7oJ7XVRALoOV97IKoY2LldkF3x6Yzd rGB7u/QnGT0DS2DkWYbttm9HSOeGZaSFNkvFjrnanHfHaofUNygjnz3GkP7zv8Iv JE9ObW3CfyOhp1Q4CCjeDyaVyFwktzIyJ7kGhbL8gYy/63IgAsLrUE20FuMx+GiL ZxE8gFIuKz6nj3woPsGtKZoozMkY92He+iUjQ45SkOfbXpNNNHXQBu3duvuZyojC qS6EtA1zdAXQjmW0PA48LOvjjYcjn7VyOTkxs/n9AoRlxxLM6cG7SUQXA7yodqg= =Co2x -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [jose] Shouldn't Cookbook 4.1 have the "might not… Brian Campbell
- Re: [jose] Shouldn't Cookbook 4.1 have the "might… Matt Miller