IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Signature crypto

Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com> Wed, 25 November 2009 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <beaton@google.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 5B6083A68E7 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 nUzwZ+9koEmZ for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.33.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0219D3A6875 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zps75.corp.google.com (zps75.corp.google.com [172.25.146.75]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id nAPJ7VT4005855 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:07:31 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1259176052; bh=M3CJAeMW00nSQuCCj/mJP4ZR/eQ=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=al6J2KMjhXigPiX+07WRJUShPU+KZ1qq8m0PsuX8R9yPANRX1gDakb0P5H4U52PR0 D3W+4jtILdSpl82xOtWrw==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=noRJsUT+76VFZn5z6QDyfDuXPA6oJBa+g7UskIjCfK/Is/PegZigfWyJBTATv7G+u LnNMSnzqTof3ZQlqGHIGw==
Received: from pxi34 (pxi34.prod.google.com [10.243.27.34]) by zps75.corp.google.com with ESMTP id nAPJ72bo021710 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:29 -0800
Received: by pxi34 with SMTP id 34so1383pxi.8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:28 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.136.21 with SMTP id j21mr481712rvd.184.1259176048037; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4B0D7EF0.5010002@jkemp.net>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343785183009@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <4B0D3698.8070706@cs.tcd.ie> <3a880e2c0911250618w358579d9o38b5ad90cb9242af@mail.gmail.com> <3D3C75174CB95F42AD6BCC56E5555B4501EE54E2@FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net> <3a880e2c0911251024g1310d64fld7adf54951433d30@mail.gmail.com> <4B0D7EF0.5010002@jkemp.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:07:28 -0800
Message-ID: <daf5b9570911251107x3d62be03s8a827acd8eb4d1ef@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
To: John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>, 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 19:07:41 -0000

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:01 AM, John Kemp <john@jkemp.net> wrote:
> In any case, I wouldn't really call it "chaos" just because there are
> multiple OSS implementations. I hope that people will develop tools that
> work for them. And I suspect that the most important parts of OAuth to
> standardize on are a) the protocol itself, b) the HTTP authentication
> mechanism and c) a method of negotiating the relevant twiddly bits, as
> necessary (and where it should be noted that "no signature at all" is
> potentially an acceptable signature algorithm).

Yep.

Whatever signature scheme we specify here is going to be obsolete in a
few years.  The most important thing is that there is a smooth upgrade
path.

Cheers,
Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email