RE: BigNum API Proposal

I think you're a little off base here

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Sleevi [] 
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 10:33 AM
To: Richard Barnes
Cc: Anthony Nadalin;
Subject: Re: BigNum API Proposal

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Richard Barnes <> wrote:
> Could you clarify why this needs to be done as a web API instead of in JS?
> To answer the obvious question: The WebCrypto API needs to provide crypto primitives so that the keying material can remain hidden from the JS in most circumstances.  Not clear to me that that applies to general BigNum stuff.

Huge +1. I think this has absolutely no place as a DOM API - which is what we're talking about.

> On Mar 4, 2013, at 12:41 PM, Anthony Nadalin <> wrote:
>> With all the discussion about blind signatures and support for BigNum, here is a draft API that Microsoft is submitting to the WG as a basis for the API. The BigNum API is common function in other JS libraries and a needed basic function for nonstandard algorithms. We would like to further discuss this at the up and coming F2F thus a heads up and a chance to read prior and looking forward to comments and discussions.
>> <CryptoAPI.j_>

Received on Monday, 4 March 2013 21:02:57 UTC