Re: [jose] jwk

[Axel Nennker <[e-mail]>]

Encoding public keys as self-signed certs: That is a hack. Not that I am
opposed to hacks but this is too much.

2012/10/29 Mike Jones <[e-mail]>

>  “x5c” helps because you can represent a bare key as a self-signed cert
> in PEM format in the “x5c” parameter.  The JOSE specs already support
> PEM-encoded keys.****
>
> ** **
>
>                                                             -- Mike****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Axel Nennker [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:14 PM
> *To:* Mike Jones
> *Cc:* [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: jwk****
>
> ** **
>
> In the case where I generate the keypair on the fly I do not have an URL
> to put in x5u. And a cert in not a public key. I want bare keys.
> I don't know how x5u and x5c help here.
>
> I have the problem that I don't know how to convert (exp,mod) into a
> pubkey on one platform (Firefox). I think that PEM is easier.
> I think the same might be true an other platforms too.
>
> Another reason I think that PEM is better is that there are command line
> tools to produce PEM-encoded keys while I don't know any tool to produce
> (exp, mod).
>
> --Axel****
>
> 2012/10/24 Mike Jones <[e-mail]>****
>
> To be clear, JWS and JWE already support the use of PEM encoded keys
> through the "x5c" and "x5u" parameters.  Therefore, I don't see any need to
> also add X.509-based key formats to JWK itself.****
>
>  ****
>
>                                                             -- Mike****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* Axel Nennker [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:55 PM
> *To:* [e-mail]
> *Cc:* Mike Jones
> *Subject:* jwk****
>
>  ****
>
>
> I think that having more choices other than (xpo, mod) is useful.
> I believe that it is easier for me to implement keys in Firefox if I have
> PEM encoded keys.
>
> So the format could be:
>
> user_jwk : {"pub":
> "MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA4OTqe0p1tgEoOVtDzjQI
> yP1Ipo8ivqTIeH4yH9kLzI4fCKx6ggZJ3h9ecj4p5E355umCThN/1doBc/tq18VGlNtyDNxCh45Z1zGYJKwZxaVaWQXlB2gfgnko1D+Zw9KIlipQHtnhJw/qREEIp4YOgaGcSZBCcQQ4DYCOjfTTbKUXSTlrlOgflfgTiyhUFuiKWkoeivwASigL76PtYNYc
> n+dlYKYB/vSQ2CY7FtaDcr22EdqUDVPLNg1+K1rsvHvllP7iTnXA5IgxT5JELdrk
> KX9Ek68zDzelOaJxs2tbkkwbqSLQfREzQ/yGAIOW9rZVqlaVBEBzUYzREmeybVq3 gwIDAQAB"
> }
> // PEM encoded public key without linebreaks
>
> A more general format would be:
>
> jwk: { "-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----":
> "MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA4OTqe0p1tgEoOVtDzjQI
> yP1Ipo8ivqTIeH4yH9kLzI4fCKx6ggZJ3h9ecj4p5E355umCThN/1doBc/tq18VGlNtyDNxCh45Z1zGYJKwZxaVaWQXlB2gfgnko1D+Zw9KIlipQHtnhJw/qREEIp4YOgaGcSZBCcQQ4DYCOjfTTbKUXSTlrlOgflfgTiyhUFuiKWkoeivwASigL76PtYNYc
> n+dlYKYB/vSQ2CY7FtaDcr22EdqUDVPLNg1+K1rsvHvllP7iTnXA5IgxT5JELdrk
> KX9Ek68zDzelOaJxs2tbkkwbqSLQfREzQ/yGAIOW9rZVqlaVBEBzUYzREmeybVq3 gwIDAQAB"
> }
>
> This general format could be used for private keys too.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Axel
>
> ps: Don't know whether I can post from this email address.... Mike, would
> you lease post it if it does appear in your inbox but not on the list.
> Thanks.****
>
> ** **
>