W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcrypto@w3.org > June 2012

Re: [W3C Web Crypto WG] Deciding if we need a discovery mechanism

From: David Dahl <ddahl@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 20:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
Cc: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>, public-webcrypto@w3.org
Message-ID: <651481959.5889062.1339127323796.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan Sleevi" <sleevi@google.com>
> To: "David Dahl" <ddahl@mozilla.com>
> Cc: "Mark Watson" <watsonm@netflix.com>, "GALINDO Virginie" <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>, public-webcrypto@w3.org
> Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2012 5:12:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [W3C Web Crypto WG] Deciding if we need a discovery mechanism

> Thanks for taking a stab at this. I think the choice of discovery
> API, and
> the behaviour such as whether it throws an error/exception, must be
> very
> closely tied with how the final API looks. 

That is a great observation. Perhaps the exception is not such a good idea.

> Thus, it's hard to
> evaluate this
> proposal without also understanding how you might see the use of
> RSA-OAEP
> and the use of ECDH-ES working, using crypto.pk.algorithms.keyenc as
> an
> example.
> 
> The reason I mention this is that I'm trying to think of how a web
> developer might extend the API locally when a given user agent does
> not
> support a desired algorithm/cryptographic primitive. Let us say, for
> example, that a U-A is able to implement all of the algorithms except
> for
> ECDH-ES. The web developer may wish to implement ECDH-ES purely
> within
> JavaScript for these cases (ignoring the bignum constraints, etc).
> How they
> do so depends on what the API looks like.
> 
I hope this scenario is an extreme edge case:)

> If algorithms are objects, you might imagine that it would be as
> simple as:
> 
> var ecdh_alg = window.crypto.pk.keyenc.ecdh_es || my_local_ecdh_es;
> var my_key_encryptor = ecdh_alg(arg1, arg2, arg3);
> 

Yes, this is elegant.

I will re-evaluate what I was doing and work from your ideas on this. Thanks!

David
Received on Friday, 8 June 2012 03:49:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 8 June 2012 03:49:13 GMT