Re: Webcrypto - project example (and issues)

TLS connection is not message based.
WebCrypto API is able to handle message based encryption.

if we use certificate derivated from TLS session for encrypting message,
 we can not guarantee the encrypted message can be transfered to
application level safely.

public-webcrypto-comments@w3.org is publicly open group mail, anyone can
post message to this groupmail
public-webcrypto@w3.org is W3C member only groupmail.


On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Aymeric Vitte <vitteaymeric@gmail.com>wrote:

>  Reading your email again, is what I am suggesting (get via Webcrypto API
> the certificates chain for TLS connections and manage it (detect changes
> for example)) in your list ?
>
> PS : what is the difference between the public-webcrypto-comments@w3.organd
> public-webcrypto@w3.org lists ?
>
>
> Le 16/11/2012 09:56, Aymeric Vitte a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> I have not right now an extensive experience with certificates
> manipulation, then if I understand correctly what is behind your summary I
> would say it is OK assuming that it does include certificate generation.
>
> I would add something not specific to certificates only that I did not
> find into the spec if I am correct : handling of format conversion such as
> PEM_to_modulus and vice-versa (see example in node-Tor)
>
> And I would add something that I mentioned in the precedent email like a
> getPeerCertificate (used for example in node.js sockets) but associated to
> the page, for example window.location.certificate where certificate is the
> certificate used to load the main page.
>
> Beside the fact that I would specifically need it for the project, the
> more global rationale is that you might not necessarily trust your browser
> and then might want to doublecheck the certificate verification, or do
> something else with the certificate
>
> Le 16/11/2012 02:49, Mountie Lee a écrit :
>
> Hi.
>
>  the certificate or TLS is belong secondary feature of WebCrypto API.
>
>  we are slightly moving to secondary features.
>
>  from the multiple pending secondary features of WebCrypto API
> I also have interest for certificate related issues.
>
>  can we list-up the requirements for certificate related issues?
>
>  followings are my list.
> - API access X509 certificate extensions
> - handling encodings from X509 certificate extensions
> - signature validation with certificate
> - certificate validation with CRL or OCSP
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Aymeric Vitte <vitteaymeric@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The draft project is here : http://www.ianonym.com, the "details"
>> section are not specs but a summary, this is an extension inside the
>> browser of https://github.com/Ayms/node-Tor which is a js implementation
>> over node.js of the Tor project.
>>
>> Assuming that the concept works (it seems to on the paper and from some
>> experimentations I made), here is what is needed accessible with js inside
>> the browser and the status today :
>>
>>     - mix node.js Buffers and Typed Arrays --> OK, home made
>>     - URL parser --> OK, home made
>>     - HTTP parser --> OK, home made
>>     - self signed certificates generation (OP) --> NOK
>>     - certificates verification (OP) --> NOK
>>     - implement TLS protocol (OP, inside websockets, both client and
>> server side) --> NOK
>>     - retrieve the certificate used for the first TLS connection between
>> the page and the OP (Evil1 attack) --> NOK
>>     - implement Tor protocol and Tor protocol websocket extension (OP,
>> inside websockets) --> OK, home made
>>     - Webcrypto like features (hash, encrypt, decrypt, rsa, aes, etc),
>> including Tor specific ones (RSA_PKCS1_OAEP_PADDING, aes-128-ctr) --> NOK
>> (or OK with Webcrypto API but when ?)
>>
>> Beside the overall technical difficulty, one of the problems is not to
>> end up with something obsolete (like most of existing js crypto libraries
>> that are not using Typed Arrays) or not to reinvent what will exist
>> tomorrow.
>>
>> And of course, implementing all of this with js will not be efficient, it
>> should better be part of a standard trustable web api.
>>
>> Even if Webcrypto API was already implemented, we see here that a lot of
>> things are still missing for this project. I don't know if it is so
>> specific, probably people will have some equivalent ideas of use with or
>> without websockets.
>>
>> Unfortunately I did not see other webapis projects implementing for
>> example certificates, TLS protocol. Therefore, maybe it should be
>> considered to extend Webcrypto so it does cover the full chain needed for
>> TLS/SSL communications and crypto tools manipulations (unless you are aware
>> that this does or will exist elsewhere as a standard).
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> A. Vitte
>>
>> --
>> jCore
>> Email :  avitte@jcore.fr
>> Web :    www.jcore.fr
>> Webble : www.webble.it
>> Extract Widget Mobile : www.extractwidget.com
>> BlimpMe! : www.blimpme.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> Mountie Lee
>
> PayGate
> CTO, CISSP
> Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
> E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net
>
>  =======================================
> PayGate Inc.
> THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT
> for Korea, Japan, China, and the World
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> jCore
> Email :  avitte@jcore.fr
> Web :    www.jcore.fr
> Webble : www.webble.it
> Extract Widget Mobile : www.extractwidget.com
> BlimpMe! : www.blimpme.com
>
>
> --
> jCore
> Email :  avitte@jcore.fr
> Web :    www.jcore.fr
> Webble : www.webble.it
> Extract Widget Mobile : www.extractwidget.com
> BlimpMe! : www.blimpme.com
>
>


-- 
Mountie Lee

PayGate
CTO, CISSP
Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net

=======================================
PayGate Inc.
THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT
for Korea, Japan, China, and the World