Hi Mike
Thanks for the clarification, indeed it all makes sense now (I would like to think a bit more about JWT as JWS JSON, will send a separate email if anything relevant comes to mind).

Cheers, Sergey
On 10/08/15 16:40, Mike Jones wrote:
Hi Sergey,

Actually, the JWT restriction to only using the compact serialization is already in the 
JWT spec itself.  The last sentence of the first paragraph of the introduction at 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7519#section-1 says "JWTs are always represented using 
the JWS Compact Serialization or the JWE Compact Serialization".  The new text in 
the JWS Unsigned Payload Option spec just adds the restriction that JWTs are to continue 
to use RFC7515 as written - base64url encoding the JWT claims as they always have been - 
for interop purposes.

That doesn't mean that other applications can't use JWS to sign detached unencoded JSON 
payloads with the "b64":false option using either JWS serialization.

Does that address what you were thinking about or do you still have concerns?

                                -- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 2:39 AM
To: Mike Jones; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [jose] JWS Signing Input Options initial working group draft

Hi, thanks for adding the JWS JSON (flattened serialization) example,

I thought the earlier text was also clear about having to use the detached 
payloads in case of JWS Compact.

Re the new JWT restriction.

I know JWT is meant to be used primarily in OAuth2 contexts as a token or grant 
(or as one of token or grant property) representation and hence it is JWS 
Compact.

But I wonder, should this particular text effectively block the possible future 
use of JWT in (JWS JSON) message payloads...

Cheers, Sergey
On 10/08/15 05:21, Mike Jones wrote:
You can't use an unencoded non-detached JSON payload using the JWS Compact Serialization because it 
uses characters that aren't URL-safe, such as "{".  For that reason, the spec now makes 
it clear that JWTs cannot use the "b64":false option.

You *can* use JSON payloads with the JWS JSON Serialization.  Any double-quote characters in the JSON 
would have to be quoted - typically using \" - so that the double-quotes don't terminate the 
"payload" value.  See the new section 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2ftools.ietf.org%2fhtml%2fdraft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options-01%23section-5&data=01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7c634a8171fb874a34dbe908d2a1678cfb%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=FdTmmqFjXX9LBw56a1%2bk2K3dPmhp89ZqEec%2bgbAcRZA%3d
 for more on character restrictions in unencoded payloads.

                                -- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: jose [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sergey
Beryozkin
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2015 3:01 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [jose] JWS Signing Input Options initial working group
draft

Hi, can you please add an example showing a b64 header affecting JWS JSON 
payload ? I can imagine how it will look like but it is good to see an example 
that can be tested locally...

Cheers, Sergey
On 23/07/15 19:17, Mike Jones wrote:
The initial working group version of JWS Signing Input Options has
been posted.  It contains no normative changes from
draft-jones-jose-jws-signing-input-options-00
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fself-issued.info%2f%3fp%3d1398&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=zQrvoO4fBOa1nUomMVoBT862ELgRpuIQ%2fBaV17ijH7Y%3d>.

Let the working group discussions begin!  I particularly call your
attention to Martin Thomson's review at
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.i
e
tf.org%2fmail-archive%2fweb%2fjose%2fcurrent%2fmsg05158.html%2c&data=
0
1%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7
e
6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=2mVSuUk74d8ZGB9gxWRy
b f%2bUz5pxOXmLiUcAqL%2bVvNk%3d Nat Sakimura's review at
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ietf.org%2fmail-archive%2fweb%2fjose%2fcurrent%2fmsg05189.html%2c&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=zdSucPmd5z%2b5Q5Zi%2fB61FmoUn9bhxmvatIl3R9WOdhQ%3d
 and Matias Woloski's review at 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ietf.org%2fmail-archive%2fweb%2fjose%2fcurrent%2fmsg05191.html&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=raojbpPQjvnjNDynLSzSydtnVe%2fnfmWvIRTD9oXoKqA%3d
 to start things off.

The specification is available at:

*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2ftoo
l
s.ietf.org%2fhtml%2fdraft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options-00&data
=
01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d
7
e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=B7CCBZSw%2f9mJ354xj
1
Vplr0CKN3KjSDXHeFuUbWYx%2fs%3d

An HTML formatted version is also available at:

*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fself
-
issued.info%2fdocs%2fdraft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options-00.htm
l
&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a424930
8
d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=H0jHGZqOrtsxM
B
EY3W7lFx2agz8V54RDoALY%2bxcjWV0%3d

                                                               -- Mike

P.S.  This note is also posted at
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fself-issued.info%2f%3fp%3d1432&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=Ehd0PdoNA2rZx9b%2bTrPOgO5G2Nxkp1FutbTnL7cD9dg%3d
 and as @selfissued 
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2ftwitter.com%2fselfissued&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40microsoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=54dOa%2fD75zbVVpfbjYFAq4yL9zmJ7q9p2qIbJRY%2flIA%3d>.



_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.
i
etf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fjose&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40mi
c
rosoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2
d
7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=fOZrXA8pnh4Z5XsMQw5ro6Fc0%2bECj%2bKjeEziSJ5V5xM%
3
d


_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.i
etf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fjose&data=01%7c01%7cmichael.jones%40mic
rosoft.com%7cf40ec174fcc442a4249308d294d7e6e0%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d
7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=fOZrXA8pnh4Z5XsMQw5ro6Fc0%2bECj%2bKjeEziSJ5V5xM%3
d




--
Sergey Beryozkin

Talend Community Coders
http://coders.talend.com/

_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

Reply via email to