IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [jose] PBES2-HS256+A128KW: where do salt and iteration count go?

"Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com> Wed, 17 July 2013 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.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 7FBD021F9343 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:08:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.918
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AU=0.377, HOST_EQ_AU=0.327, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
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 SxD3ieQyxRGJ for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ipxbno.tcif.telstra.com.au (ipxbno.tcif.telstra.com.au [203.35.82.204]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AEF21F93E4 for <jose@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.89,680,1367935200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="139392571"
Received: from unknown (HELO ipcani.tcif.telstra.com.au) ([10.97.216.200]) by ipobni.tcif.telstra.com.au with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2013 10:08:23 +1000
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7138"; a="94113927"
Received: from wsmsg3705.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.203]) by ipcani.tcif.telstra.com.au with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2013 10:08:23 +1000
Received: from WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.159]) by WSMSG3705.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.203]) with mapi; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:08:22 +1000
From: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
To: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:08:21 +1000
Thread-Topic: [jose] PBES2-HS256+A128KW: where do salt and iteration count go?
Thread-Index: Ac6CfXG9LKzZfxkVQFq5fEAYF9dGxQAAaC2A
Message-ID: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1151C7C3E1D@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
References: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1151C7C31BF@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED941152C0944@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <CAL02cgQF1O67LMivM+tzuAb-6BawPDL1m0mPC7+s=FzN7zrjwg@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6C8153@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <CAL02cgS8iVs5Qz0T6CeA-6uCoVGYwfjvDf4KvZ7svxwkVvmcGg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL02cgS8iVs5Qz0T6CeA-6uCoVGYwfjvDf4KvZ7svxwkVvmcGg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-AU
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-AU
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1151C7C3E1DWSMSG3153Vsrv_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>, "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [jose] PBES2-HS256+A128KW: where do salt and iteration count go?
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 Jul 2013 00:08:37 -0000

"kty":"PBKDF2" feels unnecessary, though "kty":"password" would be useful. A key set could have an entry like the following:

{
  "kty":"password",
 "alg":" PBES2-HS256+A128KW",
 "c-min":2000,
 "prompt":"Payment approval PIN",
 "hint":"last 4 digits of \u03C0"
}

The entry could also have a "password" field holding the actual password.
Mind you, I think mixing public (eg kty, alg) and sensitive (eg hint, password) fields side-by-side in a JSON object is a design guaranteed to lead to security breaches from poor handling.

--
James Manger

From: Richard Barnes [mailto:rlb@ipv.sx]
Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2013 9:37 AM
To: Mike Jones
Cc: Matt Miller (mamille2); Manger, James H; jose@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [jose] PBES2-HS256+A128KW: where do salt and iteration count go?

I was thinking that the "jwk" would be unnecessary.  We could have "hint" at the top level, or just use "kid" for that purpose.

--Richard

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com<mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>> wrote:
If we move “s” and “c” to being header parameters from the JWK, would we still need the JWK with “kty”:”PBKDF2”?  All that would be left would be the “hint” JWK parameter.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email