- From: David Dahl <ddahl@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Brian Smith <bsmith@mozilla.com>
- Cc: public-identity@w3.org, channy@gmail.com
To be more clear, the solutions we need to create for banking and e-commerce in countries that require a more advanced UX to sign a transaction should be a parallel piece of work separate from the core Crypto API. This functionality straddles the line between "Identity" and core crypto APIs. Cheers, david ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Dahl" <ddahl@mozilla.com> To: "Brian Smith" <bsmith@mozilla.com> Cc: public-identity@w3.org, channy@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2011 7:51:40 PM Subject: Re: Web Cryptography Working Group scoping progressing... I think this is something that we can keep on a "roadmap". The scope of the crypto API will necessarily be narrow for the first iteration, adding any kind of UI is something we should plan for in a later iteration. Cheers, David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Smith" <bsmith@mozilla.com> To: channy@gmail.com Cc: public-identity@w3.org Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2011 6:44:31 PM Subject: Re: Web Cryptography Working Group scoping progressing... Channy Yun wrote: > 3) Some of functions as like key pare generation and digital signature > generation require browser's user interface. It needs universal > interface guideline for security issues. Are smartcard digital signatures on transactions like the ones required in e-commerce / e-banking transactions in Korea, China, and elsewhere (tied to "real" legal identities) going to be considered in scope? From reading the draft scope document, I got the impression that this would be out of scope. I think it is OK for it to be out of scope, as long as there is some other (formal or informal) group working on standardizing this. It is a high priority for us. Cheers, Brian
Received on Friday, 4 November 2011 01:12:25 UTC