W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcrypto@w3.org > October 2013

Re: SEED algorithm name at WebCrypto API Spec

From: Mountie Lee <mountie@paygate.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:58:22 +0900
Message-ID: <CAE-+aYJgxZPN86P8YxEc+qQLQZDhbsLS8+UDQqWC9mLNr6tHEg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
Cc: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>, Web Cryptography Working Group <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
Hi.
thanks for reply.

I will try to prepare requirements as soon as possible.

regards
mountie.




On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote:

> If we're agreed on that, then I agree.
>
> Mountie,
>
> Would you like to propose a specific set of text to be included, such as:
> What operations are supported
> What parameters are supported
> Exact references to documentation about the implementation
> Known answer tests
>
> And I'll be happy to assign an identifier, even if no one will implement :)
>
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com> wrote:
> > I agree that SEED isn't a silver bullet, but I don't really see the harm
> in assigning them an identifier, regardless of browser support.
> >
> > Identifiers are cheap, and the existence of an identifier for an
> algorithm doesn't at all imply that browsers need to support it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 2, 2013, at 2:21 PM, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Since https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478839 in NSS and
> Fx 3.5.x, I don't believe we've materially moved the needle on unblocking
> the actual use cases where SEED is used.
> >>
> >> I'm increasingly convinced that SEED alone isn't a silver bullet to
> unblocking the use cases in S. Korea, and so I'm not sure that ACTION-64 is
> the right one to take up within this WG.
> >>
> >> On Oct 1, 2013, at 11:55 PM, Mountie Lee wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't know actually.
> >>>
> >>> my question is based on ACTION-64 (
> http://www.w3.org/2012/webcrypto/track/actions/64)
> >>>
> >>> regards
> >>> mountie.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote:
> >>> Does any user agent actually plan to implement SEED?
> >>>
> >>> On Sep 30, 2013 11:04 PM, "Mountie Lee" <mountie@paygate.net> wrote:
> >>> Hi. Ryan.
> >>>
> >>> when I see the list of registered algorithms at latest API spec
> >>> (
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-file/tip/spec/Overview.html#algorithms)
> >>>
> >>> I can not find SEED as algorithm name.
> >>>
> >>> what is required to add SEED as algorithm name in spec?
> >>>
> >>> regards
> >>> mountie.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Mountie Lee
> >>>
> >>> PayGate
> >>> CTO, CISSP
> >>> Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
> >>> E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net
> >>>
> >>> =======================================
> >>> PayGate Inc.
> >>> THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT
> >>> for Korea, Japan, China, and the World
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Mountie Lee
> >>>
> >>> PayGate
> >>> CTO, CISSP
> >>> Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
> >>> E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net
> >>>
> >>> =======================================
> >>> PayGate Inc.
> >>> THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT
> >>> for Korea, Japan, China, and the World
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>



-- 
Mountie Lee

PayGate
CTO, CISSP
Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net

=======================================
PayGate Inc.
THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT
for Korea, Japan, China, and the World
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 01:59:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:19 UTC