Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-16 Thread Antoine Delignat-Lavaud
Le 2/16/2015 6:15 AM, Brian Smith a écrit : I want to make a proposal to get PSS support into TLS 1.3 and it would certainly help if I could say that all major TLS libraries support it already. First somebody needs to create a reasonable specification detailing exactly which subset of the PSS sp

Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-16 Thread Brian Smith
Hanno Böck wrote: > Brian Smith wrote: > Having new oids with sane pre-defined parameters would vastly simplify > things. Back when I wrote that code I thought changing the standard is > harder than implementing the non-optimal spec, but I might've been > wrong. To clarify: I'm suggesting that y

Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-16 Thread Hubert Kario
On Monday 16 February 2015 18:40:59 Hanno Böck wrote: > I don't really know what channels I'd have to go through to pursue > such a preset-OID. Can an OID be defined by an RFC? How does the > interaction between the OID registration and RFCs work? Is this > something the CFRG would do or some othe

Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-16 Thread Hanno Böck
On Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:34:04 -0800 Brian Smith wrote: > I believe there are only a small number of (hashAlgorithm, mgf alg, > salt length) combinations that need to be supported, namely these two: [...] > The PSS RFC also says > that SHA-1 is mandatory, but that silliness is just an invitation fo

Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-15 Thread Brian Smith
Ryan Sleevi wrote: > - It assumes all the parameters can be expressed via a SECOidTag. That > is, it's missing hash alg, mgf alg, salt length (e.g. the > RSASSA-PSS-params construction) I believe there are only a small number of (hashAlgorithm, mgf alg, salt length) combinations that need to be

Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-15 Thread Brian Smith
[+antoine] Hanno Böck wrote: > Unfortunately the code never got fully merged. Right now the state is > that code for the basic functions exists in freebl, but all upper layer > code is not merged. There are multiple "upper layers" and, depending on your goals, some should be prioritized higher t

Re: Interested in reviving PSS support in NSS

2015-02-15 Thread Ryan Sleevi
On Sun, February 15, 2015 3:07 pm, Hanno Böck wrote: > Unfortunately the code never got fully merged. Right now the state is > that code for the basic functions exists in freebl, but all upper layer > code is not merged. I think if I remember correctly the code currently > in freebl will also