- From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 18:32:02 -0400
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- Cc: "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 22:32:29 UTC
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote: > The NoInterfaceObject is largely syntactic sugar, since interface objects > do get created once the object is exposed as an attribute. Arguably, we > could remove them all and have the exact same external behaviour. > > I'm assuming you mean to say "readonly unsigned long length" - since this > is an interface, not a dictionary. > Yep. Copy/paste error. --Richard > > I can buy that for a dollar. It matches the same justification for the > other keys - allow an app to determine (effective) security strength of the > key in question. > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote: > >> It seems like we expose length attributes for all of the *KeyAlgorithm >> interfaces besides HmacKeyAlgorithm. Also, the other *KeyAlgorithm >> interfaces have the [NoInterfaceObject] directive. >> >> Proposed micro-patch: >> +[NoInterfaceObject] >> interface HmacKeyAlgorithm : KeyAlgorithm { >> // The inner hash function to use. >> readonly attribute KeyAlgorithm hash; >> + // The length (in bits) of the key >> + [EnforceRange] unsigned long length; >> }; >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 22:32:29 UTC