- From: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:57:30 -0400
- To: "Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston)" <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Cc: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
revised to be as follows, now that I look at it more closely: Note: The Web Applications WG is seeking feedback on required algorithms for widget signatures, in particular which algorithms should be required in addition to RSAwithSHA256. The WG has not yet agreed on final set of required algorithms. This Widget Signature specification relies on XML SIgnature 1.1 which introduces new and stronger algorithms to XML Signature. The XML Security WG has not yet achieved consensus on required algorithms in XML SIgnature 1.1, in particular whether to mandate ECDSAwithSHA256. The XML Security WG is also requesting feedback on the FPWD of XML SIgnature 1.1. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Mar 19, 2009, at 9:48 AM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote: > Based on the discussion on today's call, I will add the following > editors note to Widget Signature in section 6, Algorithms [1]: > > Note: > > This Widget Signature specification relies on XML Signature 1.1 and > the Web Applications WG is also seeking feedback on required > algorithms for widget signatures, in particular which algorithms > should be required in addition to RSAwithSHA256. > > The XML Security WG has not yet achieved consensus on required > algorithms in XML SIgnature 1.1, in particular whether to mandate > ECDSAwithSHA256. The XML Security WG is requesting feedback on the > FPWD of XML SIgnature 1.1. > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch > Nokia > > > [1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-digsig/#algorithms >
Received on Thursday, 19 March 2009 13:58:22 UTC