W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcrypto@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Spec for RSA-OAEP doesn't say what to do for null or missing or array buffer view labels

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 15:33:49 -0400
Message-ID: <53BD991D.7020502@mit.edu>
To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
CC: "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
On 7/9/14, 3:16 PM, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> This is covered in
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-file/tip/spec/Overview.html#algorithm-normalizing
> ("if alg is an IDL object -> if member is nullable")

I don't believe it is.


1)  Per step 12.1.2 if member is nullable and is not present then it's
     left as "not present".  The fact that this is based on nullability,
     seems like a bug to me, by the way.
2)  Per these steps, if member is nullable and present and the value is
     null, the value is left as-is.

but the prose assumes the value will be an ArrayBuffer.  Does this spec

I do agree the ArrayBufferView case is covered by 
though that section should make it clear that it's the canonical (I 
presume) ArrayBuffer.prototype.slice that's used to do the copying.

Now that I've read this normalizing section, I have a few other comments 
on it too:

* "If alg is an IDL object:" is a bit confusing; people might think it 
means "object defined in IDL", which is not the intent.  It should 
either link to http://heycam.github.io/webidl/#es-object or just drop 
the "IDL" part.

* I'm not sure why we're returning Error instances from the "normalize 
an algorithm" steps instead of just throwing them as exceptions.  The 
latter will do the right thing because WebIDL will convert them to 
rejected promises, and seems a lot less confusing.

Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2014 19:34:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:23 UTC