[woes] Naked Public Key, was: RE: Proposed charter, post-Quebec edition

Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@oracle.com> Thu, 04 August 2011 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <hal.lockhart@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: woes@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: woes@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1B421F8663 for <woes@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:48:29 -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 ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rbmqSm5tnJ+X for <woes@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6019621F8661 for <woes@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtcsinet22.oracle.com (rtcsinet22.oracle.com [66.248.204.30]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id p74Kmf6U031865 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 20:48:43 GMT
Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by rtcsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p74KmeVj001068 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 20:48:41 GMT
Received: from abhmt109.oracle.com (abhmt109.oracle.com [141.146.116.61]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p74KmZ9B008471; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 15:48:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b9332337-4efa-4355-93a9-7866a5506bb5@default>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:48:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@oracle.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, woes@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4F25253E-A870-4956-AAB1-20890B655984@vpnc.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.4.1.0 (410211) [OL 9.0.0.6627]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: rtcsinet22.oracle.com [66.248.204.30]
X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090203.4E3B05AB.00C8,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0
Subject: [woes] Naked Public Key, was: RE: Proposed charter, post-Quebec edition
X-BeenThere: woes@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Web Object Encryption and Signing \(woes\) BOF discussion list" <woes.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/woes>, <mailto:woes-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/woes>
List-Post: <mailto:woes@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:woes-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes>, <mailto:woes-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 20:48:29 -0000

 
> 3) A Standards Track document specifying how to encode public 
> keys as JSON-structured objects.
> 

I would like to push back on the idea of only supporting naked public keys. It is my understanding that common cryto libraries, e.g. OpenSSL, expect public keys to be in certificates and the coding to get them to accept a naked key as input is ugly. I don't think they care if the cert is self signed or even signed at all, its just a format issue.

Hal