On 4/18/2018 11:25 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
On 4/18/18 12:52 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
The algorithm name decomposer implementation for algorithm
restrictions depends on the pattern:
<digest>with<encryption>
Using the same "encryption" name for signature and PKCS#1 could be
easier for applications if there is a need to decompose the algorithms.
Hmm, so do you mean this is a problem if you specify the signature
algorithm as "RSA-PSS" and require that the digest algorithm be
specified as a parameter to the API? Or something else? Not sure I
understand you but I have a feeling you are raising a good point ...
The concern is from the names BC and Andriod used:
SHA*withRSA/PSS
RSASSA-PSS (name from PKCS#1)
The signature algorithm decomposing SHA*withRSA/PSS and "SHA*" and
"RSA/PSS". If the PKCS#1 name use "RSASSA-PSS", it is tricky to map
"RSA/PSS" to "RSASSA-PSS". I'm suggesting use a consistent name.
Either "SHA*withRSA/PSS"/"RSA/PSS" or "SHA*withRSASSA-PSS"/"RSASSA-PSS".
Xuelei
--Sean
Xuelei
On 4/16/2018 11:40 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
On 4/13/18 3:25 PM, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
SunRsaSignEntries.java
----------------------
145: Where did you come up with this convention for your aliases?
SHA1withRSA-PSS
I see Bouncy Castle[1] and Android[2] are both using:
SHA*withRSA/PSS
RSASSA-PSS (name from PKCS#1)
[1]
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/blob/master/prov/src/main/java/org/bouncycastle/jcajce/provider/asymmetric/RSA.java
[2]
https://developer.android.com/reference/java/security/Signature.html
but we have neither style.
Since these standard names have not yet been defined, we don't
necessarily have to be consistent, but I don't see a good enough
reason for us to name them differently, so to help with compatibility
I would go with the names above.
--Sean
