IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Signature crypto

Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> Wed, 25 November 2009 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <eran@hueniverse.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 325F63A6947 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:19:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.274
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.274 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.325, 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 0iBM9vNVB0dM for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:19:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.180.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 491A43A6833 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:19:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 6340 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2009 16:19:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.ex1.secureserver.net) (72.167.180.21) by p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with SMTP; 25 Nov 2009 16:19:30 -0000
Received: from P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([10.6.135.19]) by P3PW5EX1HT003.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([72.167.180.21]) with mapi; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:19:30 -0700
From: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:19:40 -0700
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Signature crypto
Thread-Index: Acpt1oe5OPbwOs5tQVq0LToARcjhHgAFGQhQ
Message-ID: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343785209782@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343785183009@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <4B0D3698.8070706@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <4B0D3698.8070706@cs.tcd.ie>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Signature crypto
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, 25 Nov 2009 16:19:37 -0000

Mandating a baseline is still something we don't have consensus on. What I meant is that we agreed to allow crypto negotiation and therefore need a way to manage the algorithm names somehow. Looks like the IANA registry mentioned is the way to go.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 5:52 AM
> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
> Cc: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Signature crypto
> 
> 
> 
> Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> > I think we have consensus that the spec should not mandate a particular
> hash algorithm. This still leave the issue of assigning algorithms short names
> for the purpose of negotiation and declaration. Is there a registry available
> for such algorithms we can use or do we need to create a new one?
> 
> Sorry to have missed out on the thread where that was discussed, but it'd be
> odd for an IETF security spec to not mandate some algorithms and quite likely
> to generate comments later in the process if there's no well-defined way to
> ensure interop. Do we have that?
> 
> Ta,
> S.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email