- From: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:20:18 -0400
- To: ext David Rogers <david.rogers@omtp.org>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, "marcosc@opera.com" <marcosc@opera.com>, "Priestley, Mark, VF-Group" <Mark.Priestley@Vodafone.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Babbage, Steve, VF-Group" <Steve.Babbage@Vodafone.com>
I agree . Also to be clear Mark, I believe you are saying VF supports a MUST in the XML Signature 1.1 specification. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Apr 23, 2009, at 8:15 AM, ext David Rogers wrote: > Marcos, > > Surely the logic should support algorithm evolution in that way. If > it is a SHOULD it doesn't mean that engines need to support all > algorithms - that would be a SHALL? If we say nothing at all, you > run the risk of dropping off a security cliff if you need to migrate > in the future. A SHOULD at least prescribes an intended roadmap and > gives the option for implementers to go for that if they so choose. > > Thanks, > > David. > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-webapps-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-request@w3.org > ] On Behalf Of Marcos Caceres > Sent: 23 April 2009 08:53 > To: Priestley, Mark, VF-Group > Cc: Frederick Hirsch; Web Applications Working Group WG; Babbage, > Steve, VF-Group > Subject: Re: [widget-digsig] Pls review: Additional considerations > on elliptic curve algorithms to consider > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group > <Mark.Priestley@vodafone.com> wrote: >> Hi Frederick, All, >> >> Vodafone supports the move to support ECDSA in XML Signature 1.1 >> [2] and >> welcomes the new clarifying text. Vodafone will not object to >> ECDSAwithSHA256 being specified as mandatory [2] however we would >> like >> to propose that it is a recommended algorithm in Widgets 1.0: Digital >> Signatures [5] (e.g. a SHOULD). > > Sorry, it doesn't make sense to have them as a "should" in this > context. Either they are in or out because in practice engines will > need to support all prescribed algorithms. Lets keep to the smallest > possible subset of most commonly used algorithms in 1.0; every > algorithm we add makes this specification more difficult/expensive to > implement, adds more points of failure, etc. If the market shifts to > new algorithms, then we can add those later in a new draft. > > Kind regards, > Marcos > -- > Marcos Caceres > http://datadriven.com.au >
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 12:21:31 UTC