Hi all,
I have not read these drafts yet, so please forgive me if speaking out
of turn.
Speaking as co-chair of COSE WG, we're intermittently discussing a
recharter, and accepting new algorithms without recharter has consensus
so far. Note, though, that the COSE WG is focused on COSE and not
I don’t think there’s anything new introduced in PAR that would alter existing
status quo of privacy consiserations. As such if privacy consideration was to
be added for completeness it should be along the lines of “this document does
not expand on or otherwise alter the privacy considerations”
On 10/08/2020 11:28, Neil Madden wrote:
> Thanks Vladimir,
>
> Responses below
>
>> On 8 Aug 2020, at 10:40, Vladimir Dzhuvinov wrote:
>>
>> Hi Neil,
>>
>> I definitely like the elegance of the proposed alg for JOSE, it provides
>> something that isn't currently available in the various classes
I’m likewise supportive of the work. Note that COSE working group is currently
open whereas JOSE is closed, so if you want working group review, I’d submit
specs to COSE soon.
As background, I worked the spec
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-08 in COSE
which
I'm supportive of this work.
It is not clear that it is in the charter of the OAuth WG.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 9:01 AM Filip Skokan wrote:
> Hi Neil,
>
> I'm interested in seeing both AES SIV and ECDH-1PU for JOSE. Not sure how
> to go about it tho since JOSE is a concluded WG.
>
> Out of
I agree that there is nothing unique to PAR that would justify adding the
privacy considerations mentioned to that draft. I wouldn't oppose adding a
privacy considerations section to OAuth 2.1 though.
Aaron
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 9:42 AM Dick Hardt wrote:
> In the PAR meeting today, Denis
All,
You can find the minutes and recording of this interim meeting in
the following link:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim-2020-oauth-11/minutes/minutes-interim-2020-oauth-11-202008101200-00
Thanks to *Dick Hardt *for taking these notes.
Regards,
Rifaat
I didn't have the reference offhand during the meeting today but
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6973 looks to be a good source of
considerations for writing privacy considerations. As I mentioned, I've
written a number of such sections. Though these probably shouldn't be
considered exemplary they
In the PAR meeting today, Denis requested there be a privacy considerations
section in PAR. I don't think there is anything specific in PAR that would
change the privacy considerations of OAuth, and am checking if there is WG
interest, and consensus, on including a Privacy Considerations section
Hi Neil,
I'm interested in seeing both AES SIV and ECDH-1PU for JOSE. Not sure how
to go about it tho since JOSE is a concluded WG.
Out of curiosity, why is it a concluded WG? Did IETF/JOSE WG not consider
the need to further maintain/expand the JOSE algorithms as time goes on?
S pozdravem,
You can find the slides for today's interim here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2020-oauth-11/session/oauth
Regards,
Rifaat
___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
Thanks Vladimir,
Responses below
> On 8 Aug 2020, at 10:40, Vladimir Dzhuvinov wrote:
>
> Hi Neil,
>
> I definitely like the elegance of the proposed alg for JOSE, it provides
> something that isn't currently available in the various classes of algs
> made standard in JOSE.
>
> I also
Hi Neil
I'd be interested in seeing this draft discussed.
Dave
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 12:02, Neil Madden wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> You may remember me from such I-Ds as
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-madden-jose-ecdh-1pu-03, which proposes
> adding a new encryption algorithm to JOSE. I’d like
13 matches
Mail list logo
