I mentioned in my earlier email that I only implemented "Key Encryption", as it was fairly straight-forward and fitting existing JWE structures. I didn’t implement "Integrated Encryption" as it looked rather challenging to retrofit the ability to encrypt payload instead of CEK with an "alg".
After reading Brian Campbell’s analysis, I feel confirmed in my gut feeling that supporting Integrated Encryption would result in a rather distorted spaghetti code that is hard to maintain and hard to audit. I would therefore propose to postpone "Integrated Encryption“. If there is actual need for it (not just „because HPKE can“), it might be better to define this in a separate standard, so we can move forward with HPKE Key Encryption for now? > On 19. Jun 2025, at 04:15, Aaron Parecki <[email protected]> > wrote: > > After reflecting on some of the additional responses on the list yesterday > and reviewing the doc further, I have to say I agree with many of the > concerns expressed, and withdraw my support for publishing at this time. > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 6:12 PM Aaron Parecki <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> I support publication. >> >> --- >> Aaron Parecki >> > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
