- From: Magnus Nyström <magnus@rsa.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:09:45 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
- To: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
- cc: XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Thanks for reviewing, Frederick. On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Frederick Hirsch wrote: > Some initial comments on key encapsulation draft at > http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/key-encapsulation/key-encapsulation.html > > Substantive > > (1) I assume that the entire specification can be optional, so MUSTs only > apply when adherence to the specification is claimed. Yes, that was my intent. The MUSTs apply in the context of the specification. > (2) I'm not sure why Key Transport is listed in 4.1 and suggest this be > removed since no URI is being defined here. Use for Key Transport should be > clear from used of EncryptedKey element, isn't that right? Likewise I'm not > sure why we have section 4.4.1. The intent of section 4.4 was to make it clearer how to use generic hybrid with a key encapsulation mechanism and a key wrapping mechanism to perform key transport. I agree 4.4.1 could go away but would like to keep 4.4. > (3) The draft mentions "tight security proofs" but don't all modern > security algorithms have definitions, assumptions and proofs? What is > special in this case? (I think what is meant here is that the > "definition" provides security for a combination of key encapsulation > combined with subsequent encryption, thus addressing in a stronger way a > requirement for that combination, and having a corresponding proof). > We might want a more explicit statement and/or reference to the proofs > (actually that is in section 6, so maybe link to that section). Adding a reference to section 6 is fine with me. The security proofs rely on the actual KEM constructs and so this could (or should) be clarified too. > > (4) Is there another reference than ISO/IEC 18033-2 which requires a fee? > This makes the material hard to review. I don't know of any freely available standard describing KEM/Generic Hybrid, unfortunately. > Editorial > > (1) Abstract, in "Generic hybrid ciphers allows for a consistent treatment of > asymmetric ciphers when encrypting data and consists of a key encapsulation " > change "allows" to "allow" and "consists" to "consist" to match plural > > (2) Abstract, change "XML security" to "XML Security" > > (3) Section 3, in "Generic hybrid ciphers allows" change "allows" to "allow" Yes to 1 - 3 > (4) The reference for ISO18033-2 does not lead to the document but rather the > entire ISO site. Should I remove the link? As one cannot link to the document itself I just referenced ISO. > (5) In 4.3.2 link ISO/IEC 18033-2 seems to be broken: > http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/key-encapsulation/key-encapsulation.html#ref-ISO18033-2 Yes. Will check in an update to resolve 1 - 3) and 5) above. Thanks again, -- Magnus
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 13:10:53 UTC