- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 11:02:40 +0200
- To: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Cc: md84419@googlemail.com, public-appformats@w3.org
On 2008-05-28 11:37:39 +1000, Marcos Caceres wrote: >> I'd suggest that you just reuse the algorithm URIs from the >> various XML security specs in the autoupdate spec. Also, note >> MD5 is pretty much dead these days, so there is no point >> whatsoever in giving it any special status. > The hash check is kinda pointless because the widget must do a > CRC check on the file entries prior to instantiation, so I might > just take it out of the auto-updates proposal. Well, in today's environment, CRCs are mostly pointless. The hash may or may not be pointless: It would add a useful level of protection against tampering if the update description was, e.g., retrieved through HTTPS, but the updated widget itself through plain HTTP. In that case, you'd want a known-strong hash, though. That would work even in the absence of a signature on a widget. That's useful in my book. -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2008 09:12:46 UTC