- From: Tommy Lindberg <tommy.lindberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:49:08 +0000
- To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
- Cc: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>, XKMS WG <www-xkms@w3.org>
> We do need something - this is an area where interop > will (already has I believe) break down. > Four implementors have independantly implemented the "Limited Use Shared Secret" algorithm in a way that interoperates so I have not seen a break down yet. However, both the spec and the existing shared secret distribution points (at least my service) avoid cases that lead to ambigous interpretation. > Maybe change the spec to only allow a smaller subset of > strings to become keys I'm in favor of this option, provided that the recommendations in Section 10.4 can still be followed. Regards Tommy On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:40:38 +0000, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote: > > > Rich, All, > > >>Moreover, what does "all shared string values are encoded as XML" mean? > > > > foo&bar > > leading-whitespace > > > > Is there a good place to point to for this that has lots > of examples? > > Or... > > Should we include an example of our string2key function > that shows a whole bunch of the really nasty things you > might hit? > > Or... > > Maybe change the spec to only allow a smaller subset of > strings to become keys (raising the wrath of the I18N > folks no doubt). > > We do need something - this is an area where interop > will (already has I believe) break down. > > Stephen. > > Rich Salz wrote: > >
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2004 12:49:39 UTC