- From: Emil Lundberg via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2023 10:34:54 +0000
- To: public-webauthn@w3.org
I think what @agl is saying is that because the PRF extension adds a prefix to the input salt, a future update of the PRF extension could add a new feature that uses a different prefix and returns a `CryptoKey` instead of a raw `ByteBuffer`. This would prevent the downgrade attack @MasterKale describes: if a script injection disables the `CryptoKey` setting, then the resulting `ByteBuffer` would contain a different result than the intended `CryptoKey` result, because the two are domain-separated by using different prefixes. (But @MasterKale is right that such a downgrade attack would work if there is no such domain separation.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by emlun Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/1895#issuecomment-1580470326 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2023 10:34:56 UTC