[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-04-20 Thread Mike Jones
With the CBOR Web Token (CWT) specification nearing completion, which provides the CBOR equivalent of JWTs, I thought that it was also time to introduce the CBOR equivalent of RFC 7800, "Proof-of-Pos

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-04-20 Thread Ludwig Seitz
On 2017-04-20 21:10, Mike Jones wrote: With the CBOR Web Token (CWT) specification nearing completion, which provides the CBOR equivalent of JWTs, I thought that it was also time to introduce the CBOR equivalent of RFC 7800

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-04-21 Thread Mike Jones
est wishes, -- Mike -Original Message- From: Ace [mailto:ace-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ludwig Seitz Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 11:44 PM To: ace@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR We

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-04-23 Thread Ludwig Seitz
On 2017-04-21 18:46, Mike Jones wrote: Hi Ludwig. Thanks for your note. ~snip~ I’ll say up front, that I’d be glad to add you as a co-editor of the RFC 7800 port, Ludwig, both to acknowledge the good work you’ve already put in on the topic, and so you can help keep me honest in moving this

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-05-22 Thread Michael Richardson
Come to the discussion late, cleaning my inbox. section 3 says: "The value of the cnf claim is a JSON object and the members of that object identify the proof-of-possession key." And somehow, I think that the claim ought to be a CBOR object? Same for the paragraph of 3.4. I found the

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-05-22 Thread Mike Jones
Mike Jones<mailto:michael.jo...@microsoft.com> Cc: ace@ietf.org<mailto:ace@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) Come to the discussion late, cleaning my inbox. section 3 says: "The value of the cnf claim is a JSON object an

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs)

2017-06-29 Thread Mike Jones
-- Mike -Original Message- From: Ace [mailto:ace-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 11:17 AM To: Mike Jones Cc: ace@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) Come to the discussion late, cleaning

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec fixing nits

2019-02-21 Thread Mike Jones
The Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification has been updated to address issues identified by Roman Danyliw while writing his shepherd review. Thanks to Samuel Erdtman for fixing an incorrect example. The specification is available at: * https://tools.ietf

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec addressing review comments

2017-06-30 Thread Mike Jones
The Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification has been updated to address comments received since its initial publication. Changes were: * Tracked CBOR Web Token (CWT) Claims Registry updates. * Addressed review comments by Michael Richardson and Jim Sch

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec addressing WGLC comments

2018-06-29 Thread Mike Jones
A new draft of the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification has been published that addresses the Working Group Last Call (WGLC) comments received. Changes were: * Addressed review comments by Jim Schaad, see https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ace/curre

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) is now RFC 8747

2020-03-09 Thread Mike Jones
I'm pleased to report that Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) is now RFC 8747. The abstract of the specification is: This specification describes how to declare in a CBOR Web Token (CWT) (which is defined by RFC 8392) that

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec using CBOR diagnostic notation

2017-10-30 Thread Mike Jones
Draft -01 of the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification updates the examples to use CBOR diagnostic notation, thanks to Ludwig Seitz. A table summarizing the "cnf" names, keys, and value types was added, thanks to Samuel Erdtman. Finally, some of Jim Schaad'

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec with a few improvements

2018-03-03 Thread Mike Jones
A few local improvements have been made to the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification. Changes were: * Changed "typically" to "often" when describing ways of performing proof of possession. * Changed b64 to hex encoding in an example. * Changed to

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec adding Key ID considerations

2018-11-09 Thread Mike Jones
Key ID confirmation method considerations suggested by Jim Schaad have been added to the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification. Per discussions in the working group meeting in Bangkok, it's now time for the shepherd review. The specification is available at

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) sent to the RFC Editor

2019-11-06 Thread Mike Jones
I'm pleased to report that the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification is now technically stable and will shortly be an RFC - an Internet standard. Specifically, it has now progressed to the RFC Editor queue, meaning that the only remaining step before finaliz

Re: [Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec adding Key ID considerations

2018-11-11 Thread Jim Schaad
Roman, This version addresses this issue. As I have stated in the past, I am not happy with resolution of a large number of the issues that I have raised, but I am not going to try and hold up this document. Jim From: Mike Jones Sent: Friday, November 9, 2018 6:10 PM To: ace@ie

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec addressing Area Director review comments

2019-09-19 Thread Mike Jones
The Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification has been updated to address the Area Director review comments by Benjamin Kaduk. Thanks to Ludwig Seitz and Hannes Tschofenig for their work on resolving the issues raised. The specification is available at: *

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec addressing remaining Area Director comments

2019-10-01 Thread Mike Jones
A new version of the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification has been published to address the remaining Area Director review comments by Benjamin Kaduk. Thanks to Ludwig Seitz for doing the bulk of the editing for this version. The specification is available

[Ace] Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) spec addressing Gen-ART and SecDir reviews

2019-10-21 Thread Mike Jones
A new version of the Proof-of-Possession Key Semantics for CBOR Web Tokens (CWTs) specification has been published addressing the Gen-ART and SecDir review comments. Thanks to Christer Holmberg and Yoav Nir, respectively, for these useful reviews. The specification is available at: * http