- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 21:44:50 +0100
- To: "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
Now, if we don't have key import/export, it seems to me it seems we're limiting ourselves to ephemeral keys generated in the JS by the same origin. Since we have no multi-origin policies and same-origin is the de-facto way to do this, I'm happy with that. In the spec now, there is just a place-holder: " 15.2.8. The importKey method 15.2.9. The exportKey method" Nonetheless, I think a key import/export function might be useful. High-level libraries like Keyczar do key import/export, see their Encrypter method [1]. Could we do something similar and just lean on the File API to do the reading of keys [2], with a check to make sure the file is a valid bytestream or serialized JOSE key. That would also cause a dependency on the File API. Arun, when is the File API supposed to go to Rec? The hard issue is how this interfaces with same-origin and privacy. Two thoughts: Re privacy, I think we should say that if the key-material is a private key, moving it into structured clone localStorage/indexedDB should require a user prompt, and leave it to the implementer to define the security/privacy message to be stated. Re same-origin, we could state that if the key is imported by explicit user selection (i.e. see privacy), then the key is treated as if it were generated by same-origin of the JS that called the File API to import the key. In export, we don't worry about it. Thus we don't have to deal with same origins. Thus we can still close ISSUE-19/ISSUE-26. Before writing a WebIDL, I wanted a sanity-check on the thinking. cheers, harry [1]http://www.keyczar.org/javadocs/index.html?org/keyczar/Encrypter.html [2]http://www.w3.org/TR/FileAPI/
Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 20:44:58 UTC