Re: JSONWebSignature2020 vs JcsEd25519Signature2022

>
> *It feels like we might have a nice performance improvement and crypto
> agility gain, by having `JsonWebSignature2020` use JCS... but otherwise
> align with the proposal from fep-390.*


*+1*

Butters @ Salesforce | Software Architect


On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:11 AM Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
wrote:

> Friends,
>
> I recently became aware of:
>
> https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/feps/fep-c390.md
>
> The proposal suggests there may be a desire to use "Data Integrity Proofs"
> with "Activity Streams"...
>
> This would be relevant to Mastodon and other fediverse projects.
>
> There has been past work in this area, here are some links:
>
>
> https://github.com/transmute-industries/RsaSignature2017/blob/master/src/__tests__/Mastodon.Integration.spec.js
>
> More recently these 2 items seem like they might potentially support the
> request as it exists in fep-c390.
>
> https://github.com/w3c/vc-jws-2020
> https://github.com/decentralized-identity/JcsEd25519Signature2020
>
> There are 2 technical issues that have been discussed previously which I
> would like to resurface in the context of this request:
>
> 1. Should JsonWebSignature2020 use URDNA2015 and JCS, or just JCS?... (for
> those who don't know, URDNA uses JCS under the hood for `@json` types).
> 2. Should JsonWebSignature2020 use `proofValue`... with detached JWS just
> like it does today?
>
> It feels like we might have a nice performance improvement and crypto
> agility gain, by having `JsonWebSignature2020` use JCS... but otherwise
> align with the proposal from fep-390.
>
> Regards,
>
> OS
>
> --
> *ORIE STEELE*
> Chief Technical Officer
> www.transmute.industries
>
> <https://www.transmute.industries>
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2023 21:15:40 UTC