IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #15: Should at least on key indicator be mandatory

Sascha Preibisch <spreibisch@layer7tech.com> Wed, 17 April 2013 16:01 UTC

Return-Path: <spreibisch@layer7tech.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 AE8D121F86D5 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.264
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 vK8aAD8vqxfV for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp126.dfw.emailsrvr.com (smtp126.dfw.emailsrvr.com [67.192.241.126]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B947621F86D2 for <jose@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp12.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp12.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 198283C03A5 for <jose@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:01:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-SMTPDoctor-Processed: csmtpprox 2.7.4
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp12.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 052263C03B5 for <jose@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:01:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: OK
Received: from smtp192.mex07a.mlsrvr.com (unknown [67.192.133.128]) by smtp12.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTPS id D74FD3C03A5 for <jose@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:01:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DFW1MBX21.mex07a.mlsrvr.com ([192.168.1.235]) by DFW1HUB09.mex07a.mlsrvr.com ([fe80::222:19ff:fe91:f83a%11]) with mapi; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:01:02 -0500
From: Sascha Preibisch <spreibisch@layer7tech.com>
To: "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:01:02 -0500
Thread-Topic: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #15: Should at least on key indicator be mandatory
Thread-Index: Ac43EJ4jOlR90PnMQKa8jB7FjMoH0QEdBwng
Message-ID: <260FAD4C9002884C89DF49EF8776EB9B2A9811506E@DFW1MBX21.mex07a.mlsrvr.com>
References: <51674E63.3050809@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <51674E63.3050809@isoc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_260FAD4C9002884C89DF49EF8776EB9B2A9811506EDFW1MBX21mex0_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #15: Should at least on key indicator be mandatory
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: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:01:04 -0000

1

From: jose-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Karen O'Donoghue
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 5:00 PM
To: jose@ietf.org
Subject: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #15: Should at least on key indicator be mandatory

Issue #15 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/15. suggests requiring that a key indicator, such as a "kid" field, be required in all JWS and JWE headers. Are use cases where key information is exchanged by means other than the JWS or JWE headers important?
Which of these best describes your preferences on this issue?
1.  Yes.
2.   No.
0.  I need more information to decide.

Your reply is requested by Friday, April 19th (or earlier).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email