Re: [OAUTH-WG] signatures, v2

Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com> Wed, 21 July 2010 08:26 UTC

Return-Path: <sakimura@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563163A67FC for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nu-JqBhdgEpm for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF8AD3A68B3 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:26:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk1 with SMTP id 1so3609899gxk.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=u7DVzXkFnVMsPEkZrLSuiEUE8wtyYtsin80rxxPhHBk=; b=W42jptDPIKvT0WUPtL5w5yNUCEQX5iiT7yh51U8TapvhNSWsdZ2lL7+JQ+UYe6VHXk R98JvJcKO7WLub/9rzSD29NKAJCMnftLSi3ar0kuwGLgESbkQ8q96o026ITRLvcD9EC5 3hR3+By+GRX/1mgm40vIp5YB9ePY2lROct0hw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=qUb+oFssXI6+EllPGNMUjEqD6Lu4Esjvd0B71AXS6XMI0syJbiFsI2BaJFL9A+O961 oh7IvT6DoK+Ls/2vAw3TiWUdxaLqE/MuMDbA5c7rURR1M5d2J1AIivIzqzi/iAmLGbqV r/kfOGeEfU1+rrUnmx+fhCiehFnOCqr3xfzoM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.90.102.8 with SMTP id z8mr1039064agb.101.1279700784050; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.158.67 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilBFabSRsxshSuBbzbYqwv7MzPbMq-fUBShjX9L@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTim7pvrLnQtz4WnDvYVRv0jbWgk3j8uMJj07CsM1@mail.gmail.com> <4C431BA3.2000907@lodderstedt.net> <AANLkTilBFabSRsxshSuBbzbYqwv7MzPbMq-fUBShjX9L@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:26:23 +0900
Message-ID: <AANLkTiks+y2gUFB1L1qnDnOxmAmiAVmHukSXwXQZu3AU@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com>
To: Dirk Balfanz <balfanz@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] signatures, v2
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:26:12 -0000

Hi Dirk,

Inline:

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Dirk Balfanz <balfanz@google.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt
> <torsten@lodderstedt.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dirk,
>>
>> I have some questions concerning your proposal:
>>
>> - As far as I understand, the difference to "magic signatures" lays in the
>> usage of a JSON token carrying issuer, not_before, not_after and audience.
>> While such properties are important for security tokens (assertions), I
>> cannot see an advantage of using this format for signatures of HTTP
>> requests. Would you please explain?
>
> You mean advantage over magic signatures? It's really a similar idea - it's
> just that magic signatures as is don't quite fit the bill. For example, they
> have newlines in
> them: http://salmon-protocol.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/draft-panzer-magicsig-00.html#anchor5

Well, they MAY, but they do not have to. Would not profiling Magic
Signatures so that it does not contain newlines do?



-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
http://www.sakimura.org/en/
http://twitter.com/_nat_en