W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > May 2009

ECDSA, "plain" vs "non-plain"

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 19:18:24 +0200
Message-Id: <D5B52FCF-6D1B-41F3-A063-6729394C9F6D@w3.org>
To: XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Cc: Konrad Lanz <konrad.lanz@iaik.tugraz.at>
To put this into the public record...  I asked some security folks at  
the IETF; their comment was that there is no known security difference  
between the two variants, which is useful to confirm.

For the ECDSA algorithms that we define so far, we actually *don't*  
use the ASN.1 sequence, in other words, we're going for the "plain"  
alternative anyway.  That, to me, suggests that we only coin  
identifiers for the "plain" variants of ECDSA-RIPEMD160 (and - 
whirlpool), and dont bother with the non-plain ones.


Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 17:18:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:11 UTC