I don't like #3 as well, as it looks like "RSA" key get used, and '/'
has special meaning when there is a need to parse the algorithm name.
I like more of #2 "RSASSA-PSS", as it is the formal name used in RFC
8017, TLS 1.3 and RFC 4056, etc.
Xuelei
On 4/27/2018 4:41 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
I'd also strongly prefer to pick one as standard name for RSA PSS
signature and use it consistently.
Here are the possible choices for RSA PSS standard names:
1. RSA-PSS
2. RSASSA-PSS
3. RSA/PSS
4. RSAPSS
#1,#2 are from 3rd party provider, #3 is what I have in current webrev,
#4 is just a new alternative in case people may prefer it over #1.
My preference is #1, #2, and #4. My reason for steering away from #3 is
due to that "/" is used by Cipher transformation string. Though
Signature algorithm is separate from Cipher transformation, but RSA can
be used for encryption and having that "/" is potentially very confusing.
Comments? Please share your preference soon so I can update the webrev
accordingly...
Thanks,
Valerie
On 4/18/2018 11:36 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
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
