Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-06
review-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-06-secdir-lc-dunbar-2020-05-26-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2020-05-27
Requested 2020-05-13
Authors Michael Jones
Draft last updated 2020-05-26
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Linda Dunbar
State Completed
Review review-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-06-secdir-lc-dunbar-2020-05-26
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/v7QUEwpAC_t9R2zcLvpMULWAqgE
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 08)
Result Not Ready
Completed 2020-05-26
review-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-06-secdir-lc-dunbar-2020-05-26-00
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors.
 Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other
 last call comments.

This document is to list down the COSE&JOSE Algorithms to be registered to
IANA. But it seems the description is not complete. In the Section 2: among the
4 algorithms listed under RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5, three are NOT recommended, one is
deprecated. Under the Security Consideration (Section 5), Section 5.2 describes
why SHA-2 is "Not Recommended", Section 5.3 describes why SHA-1 is
"Deprecated".  What about the description on why SHA-512,  SHA-384, and SHA-256
are not recommended?  Is the missing description intended?

Best Regards,

Linda Dunbar