W3C

XML Security Working Group Teleconference
23 Feb 2010

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Frederick_Hirsch, Scott_Cantor, Cynthia_Martin, John_Wray, Thomas_Roessler, Brian_LaMacchia, Bruce_Rich, Pratik_Datta, Hal_Lockhart, Gerald_Edgar, Ed_Simon, Magnus_Nystrom, Juan_Carlos_Cruellas, Aldrin_D'Souza, Aldrin_DSouza
Regrets
Chair
Frederick Hirsch
Scribe
Gerald-Edgar

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 23 February 2010

Administrative

<fjh> No teleconference 16 or 23 March.

<fjh> IETF Elliptic Curve Private Key Structure informational RFC published

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Feb/0032.html

Minutes Approval

<fjh> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/16-xmlsec-minutes.html

<scribe> Scribe: Gerald-E

RESOLUTION: Minutes approved
... Minutes approved

<fjh> Resolution: Minutes 16 Feb Approved

Editorial update

<fjh> XML Signature Properties

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Feb/0033.html

<fjh> XML Signature 1.1 for KeyInfoReference

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Feb/0034.html

<fjh> issue-188?

<trackbot> ISSUE-188 -- Agreement referenced in XML Signature 1.1 but definition not clear -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/188

fjh: the 1.0 schema was not changed

<fjh> issue-188?

<trackbot> ISSUE-188 -- Agreement referenced in XML Signature 1.1 but definition not clear -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/188

fjh: do we want to refer to derived key?

<fjh> XML Signature 1.1 section 4.5.8, http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-keyconvenance

<fjh> The <xenc:EncryptedKey> and <xenc:Agreement> elements defined in [XMLENC-CORE1] as children of ds:KeyInfo can be used to convey in-band key agreement information, or encrypted key material."

<fjh> xenc:Agreement does not appear in XML Encryption 1.1 or in the XML Encryption schema?

ECC

<fjh> no change in status

<tlr> no news

XML Encryption 1.1

<fjh> issue-186?

<trackbot> ISSUE-186 -- What is the normative content of section 5.4.2? (PBKDF2) -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/186

<fjh> action-515?

<trackbot> ACTION-515 -- Aldrin J D'Souza to propose the schema addition for issue-186 -- due 2010-02-23 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/515

<scribe> In progress.

fjh: cpontent and element encryption, related to EXI work
... we do not need to address EXI specifically

<fjh> content and element related EXI - no further action needed

<fjh> tlr notes element and content can be processed uniformly for EXI, so only EXI type required

<fjh> tlr asked for EXI review

tlr: there is no use case for EXI, as far as we are concerned, there is no reason beyond the cleartext EXI string

<fjh> issue-180?

<trackbot> ISSUE-180 -- Section 8 identifies Joseph Reagle as the contact for the XML Encryption media type. This needs to be updated, perhaps to a generic identity? -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/180

<fjh> action-511?

<trackbot> ACTION-511 -- Thomas Roessler to propose next steps on media type registration (ISSUE-180) -- due 2010-03-15 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/511

tlr: this will be later

<fjh> Review of Generic Hybrid Ciphers

<fjh> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/key-encapsulation/generic-hybrid.html

<fjh> action-238?

<trackbot> ACTION-238 -- Thomas Roessler to update the proposal associated with ACTION-222 and send to list. -- due 2010-03-31 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/238

<fjh> action-222?

<trackbot> ACTION-222 -- Konrad Lanz to make proposal RIPE algorithms -- due 2009-03-03 -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/222

fjh: the intent is to go to call with generic hybid ciphers

<fjh> Proposed ACTION: Draft proposal to add ECDSA-RIPEMD160 and ECDSA-

<fjh> Whirlpool to Security Algorithm Cross Reference.

fjh: to include the algorithm in the list of algorithms

<fjh> URI defined in expired internet draft from Eastlake

tlr: to do a simple internet draft for these
... the list of algorithms could be normative, but it is low priority

<fjh> bal notes that these may not be needed

tlr: to write an internet draft, if he has time
... he does not want to give up on this yet

<fjh> Proposed RESOLUTION: The XML Security WG will not define algorithms in the Algorithms Cross Reference, and will not take action on RIPE or Whirlpool until an item needs to be added to the cross reference

RESOLUTION: The XML Security WG will not define algorithms in the Algorithms Cross Reference, and will not take action on RIPE or Whirlpool until an item needs to be added to the cross reference

Roadmap

<fjh> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-xmlsec/2010Feb/0018.html

fjh: plans for going forward. At the end of this month we want to go to last call with encruption matieral and publish updates.
... we need to deal with ECC issues
... there are no new last call issues
... to have the last call for Encryption
... there is a need for interop
... we need to have interoperability and ECC resolution
... there is no need for a face to face
... there is some hope for ECC
... last call for encyption will be later than the end of the month

tlr: give the EXI group time to react to the request to review

fjh: to have a working draft publication

tlr: no publication between second of march and the end of the month

fjh: to go to last call on the 30th of march.
... there may be some movement on ECC

tlr: there would not be publication from march 5 to march 24

fjh: it is better not to rush. We can publish on the 2nd.

XML Signature 2.0

pdatta has done work on the drafts

pdatta: he is added information to make it easier to understand, adding explaination

fjh: sent the draft to the list for review.
... people can comment on this.

<fjh> ACTION: fjh to share pubrules info with pratik [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-527 - Share pubrules info with pratik [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-03-02].

<fjh> all - please review the 2.0 Canonical XML and SIgnature drafts, also review Encryption 1.1 and Generic Hybrid ciphers

<fjh> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/open

<fjh> action-238?

<trackbot> ACTION-238 -- Thomas Roessler to update the proposal associated with ACTION-222 and send to list. -- due 2010-03-31 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/238

<fjh> action-222?

<trackbot> ACTION-222 -- Konrad Lanz to make proposal RIPE algorithms -- due 2009-03-03 -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/222

<fjh> action-280?

<trackbot> ACTION-280 -- Magnus Nyström to produce test cases for derived keys -- due 2009-05-19 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/280

<fjh> action-382?

<trackbot> ACTION-382 -- Pratik Datta to add guidance on semantic equivalence to Signature 2.0 related to ISSUE-131, which defaults, how equivalent does it get -- due 2009-10-06 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/382

<fjh> issue-131?

<trackbot> ISSUE-131 -- Is semantic equivalence robustness in requirements document -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/131

<fjh> action-382 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-382 Add guidance on semantic equivalence to Signature 2.0 related to ISSUE-131, which defaults, how equivalent does it get closed

<fjh> action-411?

<trackbot> ACTION-411 -- Pratik Datta to perform measurement related to transform octet conversion -- due 2009-10-27 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/411

<tlr> action-411 due 2010-04-30

<trackbot> ACTION-411 Perform measurement related to transform octet conversion due date now 2010-04-30

<fjh> plan to do in next month or two, compare old 1.0, current 1.0 and 2.0

<fjh> action-412?

<trackbot> ACTION-412 -- Ed Simon to review ISSUE-115 -- due 2009-10-27 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/412

<fjh> issue-115?

<trackbot> ISSUE-115 -- XPath Filter Transform and Namespace Declarations for Qualified Nodes, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2009Apr/0025.html -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/115

<fjh> action-412 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-412 Review ISSUE-115 closed

<fjh> action-441?

<trackbot> ACTION-441 -- Cynthia Martin to review BSP 1.1 (http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicSecurityProfile-1.1.html) with respect to Signature 1.1 and Encryption 1.1 -- due 2009-11-13 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/441

Cynthia: A note was sent out some time ago.

<tlr> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Jan/0040.html

Cynthia: I did not see a reason to do the second part of this.

tlr: there are comments that point out flaws in BSP

bsp 1.1 was recently updated last year

bal: they are reluctant to change their documents
... he can forward comments to Paul [Cotton]

<fjh> link for paul - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Jan/att-0040/ACTION_441_Impact_of_BSP_on_XML_DSIG_v1.1_01.11.10.pdf

<tlr> action-441 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-441 Review BSP 1.1 (http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicSecurityProfile-1.1.html) with respect to Signature 1.1 and Encryption 1.1 closed

<fjh> action-441 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-441 Review BSP 1.1 (http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicSecurityProfile-1.1.html) with respect to Signature 1.1 and Encryption 1.1 closed

tlr: this action was well done

<fjh> action-447?

<trackbot> ACTION-447 -- Cynthia Martin to review wrapping attack article, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2009Nov/0019.html -- due 2009-11-17 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/447

Cynthia: she sent a short note on wrapping attacks, there are issues and we can not address all of them

tlr: there are no records of this in the public list

fjh: we cant to make sure comments get back to the authors of the article

Cynthia: we put too much discussion in the document because there are many variations and we can not address each one specifically

<fjh> action-447 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-447 Review wrapping attack article, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2009Nov/0019.html closed

<fjh> action-456?

<trackbot> ACTION-456 -- Scott Cantor to review workshop papers regarding strengthening id based references with respect to wrapping attacks -- due 2009-11-24 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/456

<fjh> action-503?

<trackbot> ACTION-503 -- Scott Cantor to raise use of XML Signature 1.1 in OASIS SSTC -- due 2010-01-26 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/503

<fjh> action-503 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-503 Raise use of XML Signature 1.1 in OASIS SSTC closed

<fjh> ACTION-504 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-504 Remind ws-sx of xml signature 1.1 closed

<fjh> action-512?

<trackbot> ACTION-512 -- Ed Simon to look at XML Encryption content vs. element options when content equals element -- due 2010-02-09 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/512

<fjh> action-512 closed

<trackbot> ACTION-512 Look at XML Encryption content vs. element options when content equals element closed

<fjh> action-520?

<trackbot> ACTION-520 -- Pratik Datta to circulate list of differences on xmlsec mailing list -- due 2010-02-23 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/520

<fjh> changes to normative processing rules

to outline changes in normative processing rules. This was addressed in the last meeting

Issue Review

<fjh> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/open

<fjh> issue-9?

<trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- Review WS-I BSP constraints on DSig -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/9

<fjh> issue-9?

<trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- Review WS-I BSP constraints on DSig -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/9

<fjh> issue-9 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-9 Review WS-I BSP constraints on DSig closed

<fjh> issue-43?

<trackbot> ISSUE-43 -- Improvements to XML Signature schema -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/43

<fjh> possible additional change related to serial number

<fjh> limited changes possible with schema

XML Encryption

<fjh> issue-188?

<trackbot> ISSUE-188 -- Agreement referenced in XML Signature 1.1 but definition not clear -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/188

<fjh> ACTION: magnus to review issue-188 related to xenc:Agreement referenced from XML Signature 1.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-528 - Review issue-188 related to xenc:Agreement referenced from XML Signature 1.1 [on Magnus Nystrom - due 2010-03-02].

fjh: there is derived key, but not key agreement, this needs to be clear, did we mean derived key?

Magnus: [There is]notation not fuctionality, there are suggested changes

Magnus: he will forward the comments and proposed changes to the spec

Magnus: a request to delay a week for changes connected to generic hybird

tlr: issues regarding publication schedules
... let us see how much we can get done by next week

<tlr> publishing GH is relatively cheap..

tlr: if there is time to get the changes in soon we could publish, or we wait until the end of March

<fjh> issue-63?

<trackbot> ISSUE-63 -- Namespace requirements: undeclarations, QNames, use of partial content in new contexts -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/63

<fjh> note dealt with in 2.0 work

fjh: is there any objection to closing this?

<fjh> undelarations moot

<fjh> issue-63 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-63 Namespace requirements: undeclarations, QNames, use of partial content in new contexts closed

<fjh> issue-123?

<trackbot> ISSUE-123 -- How in 2.0 to disallow SHA-1 when algorithm URI currently defined -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/123

fjh: SHA-1 is not recommended

<fjh> magnus notes we dealt with this in 1.1

tlr: we are at the point that we know what we want to do with SHA-1
... he does not know a reason to keep this

Gerald-E: we need to maintin backward compatability

<tlr> http://www.w3.org/2009/05/12-xmlsec-minutes.html#item10

<tlr> (context for ISSUE-123)

tlr: [We might need] to have a erratum to maintain backward compatability
... the question of removing the pointer to it in the 2.0 spec

fjh: there is the warning in 2.0 carried forward from 1.1

tlr: to close Issue 123
... deal with this the same way as 1.1

<tlr> ISSUE-123 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-123 How in 2.0 to disallow SHA-1 when algorithm URI currently defined closed

<fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: Retain SHA-1 in XML Signature 2.0 as in XML Signature 1.1 to retain backward compatibility for implementations

RESOLUTION: Retain SHA-1 in XML Signature 2.0 as in XML Signature 1.1 to retain backward compatibility for implementations

<fjh> issue-132?

<trackbot> ISSUE-132 -- Keep 2.0 xenc transform feature in sync with signature 2.0 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/132

tlr: he has no knowledge that we are working on this
... we shoujld keep this issue open and we revisit this when 2.0 comes out of last call

<tlr> ISSUE-132: suggest to revisit when xml sig 2.0 comes out of last call

<trackbot> ISSUE-132 Keep 2.0 xenc transform feature in sync with signature 2.0 notes added

<fjh> issue-138?

<trackbot> ISSUE-138 -- What interoperability and security issues arise out of schema validation behavior? -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/138

<fjh> Ed plans to look at this in April timeframe

<fjh> issue-140?

<trackbot> ISSUE-140 -- Clarify how XPath is interpreted relative to entire document and ds:Reference -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/140

scott: there is some questoin of the base of Xpath

<fjh> issue-144?

<trackbot> ISSUE-144 -- XML Schema and DTD inconsistency for SPKISexp element -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/144

<fjh> dropped DTD, so moot

<fjh> issue-144 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-144 XML Schema and DTD inconsistency for SPKISexp element closed

<fjh> issue-150?

<trackbot> ISSUE-150 -- Use of XML encryption type encoding in EXI -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/150

<fjh> issue-151?

<trackbot> ISSUE-151 -- Review XML SIgnature 2.0 and Canonical XML 2.0 for testable assertions -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/151

<tlr> [ I recommend ] to close this

<fjh> focus on interoperable testing versus assertions; plan to continue treating as before

<fjh> issue-151 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-151 Review XML SIgnature 2.0 and Canonical XML 2.0 for testable assertions closed

<fjh> issue-152?

<trackbot> ISSUE-152 -- Add pratik as author to xpath subset document if produced by ws-ra -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/152

<fjh> issue-153?

<trackbot> ISSUE-153 -- Change Canonicalization 2.0 to replace the pseudo code snippets with descriptive text, and move all the pseudo code to another non normative section -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/153

<fjh> done

<fjh> issue-153 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-153 Change Canonicalization 2.0 to replace the pseudo code snippets with descriptive text, and move all the pseudo code to another non normative section closed

Pdatta: this is done

<fjh> issue-156?

<trackbot> ISSUE-156 -- Threat for signature from use of namespace prefixes with corresponding unsigned namespace declarations leading to wrapping like attacks -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/156

<fjh> scott notes that canonicalization should be taking care of this

<fjh> cynthia suggestion - add text to document that namespace prefixes should be included in signature, add warning

<fjh> this is a 2.0 issue

<fjh> pratik notes he added material to C14N 2.0 on this item

Scott: that this is a prefix and not part of the string

ed: namespaces are used in the XPath xform

<fjh> issue-159?

<trackbot> ISSUE-159 -- Address/document potential security issues due to mismatch of security and application processing, including wrapping attacks -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/159

<fjh> waiting for potential new member of wg to help with this

tlr: keep this issue open

<fjh> s/thsi/this

Scott: there is additional text for issue-43

<scantor> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/43

<fjh> issue-160?

<trackbot> ISSUE-160 -- Define URI for Canonical XML 2.0, add section to Signature 2.0 defining Canonical XML 2.0 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/160

tlr: this is still open

<fjh> issue-161?

<trackbot> ISSUE-161 -- Should the RetrievalMethod schema error be fixed in 2.0, see note at end of http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-RetrievalMethod -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/161

fjh Issue 161 have been overtaken by events

<fjh> issue-162?

<trackbot> ISSUE-162 -- Will reliable determination of Object element type and encoding be possible under 2.0 Transform -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/162

<fjh> issue-164?

<trackbot> ISSUE-164 -- RNG schema needed for Generic Hybrid Ciphers -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/164

<fjh> Makoto working on this

<fjh> issue-170?

<trackbot> ISSUE-170 -- Should we recomend signing namespaces as part of Best Practice 12 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/170

<fjh> issue-171?

<trackbot> ISSUE-171 -- Review references in XML Security 1.1 requirements and XML Security 2.0 requirements -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/171

<fjh> I did this.

<fjh> issue-171 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-171 Review references in XML Security 1.1 requirements and XML Security 2.0 requirements closed

<fjh> issue-172?

<trackbot> ISSUE-172 -- Acknowledge WG in Signature Properties -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/172

<fjh> issue-172 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-172 Acknowledge WG in Signature Properties closed

<fjh> issue-178?

<trackbot> ISSUE-178 -- Highlight additional text constraints on XSD schema as such. -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/178

fjh: there are people who depend on this.

<fjh> look at when reviewing XML Encryption 1.1

<fjh> issue-179?

<trackbot> ISSUE-179 -- Update ECC warning for last call -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/179

<fjh> thomas did this

<fjh> issue-179 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-179 Update ECC warning for last call closed

<fjh> issue-180?

<trackbot> ISSUE-180 -- Section 8 identifies Joseph Reagle as the contact for the XML Encryption media type. This needs to be updated, perhaps to a generic identity? -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/180

<fjh> issue-181?

<trackbot> ISSUE-181 -- Clarify section 1.3 of xml encryption re versioning and namespaces -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/181

<tlr> yes

<fjh> issue-181 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-181 Clarify section 1.3 of xml encryption re versioning and namespaces closed

<fjh> issue-182?

<trackbot> ISSUE-182 -- Need Retrieval Method proposal for 2.0, KeyInfo correction or continuation of original material -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/182

<tlr> ISSUE-182: actually dealt with in 1.1, KeyInfoReference

<trackbot> ISSUE-182 Need Retrieval Method proposal for 2.0, KeyInfo correction or continuation of original material notes added

<fjh> KeyInfoReference addresses this one

<fjh> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-KeyInfoReference

fjh: this was a key-info reference

<tlr> ACTION: pratik to add KeyInfoReference to Signature 2.0 (ISSUE-182) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-529 - Add KeyInfoReference to Signature 2.0 (ISSUE-182) [on Pratik Datta - due 2010-03-02].

<fjh> issue-182 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-182 Need Retrieval Method proposal for 2.0, KeyInfo correction or continuation of original material closed

fjh: close this issue when the issue when the action is done

<fjh> issue-183?

<trackbot> ISSUE-183 -- Constrain 2.0 SignedInfo canonicalization choice for 2.0 model? -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/183

tlr: but we have an action to cover this

<fjh> issue-184?

<trackbot> ISSUE-184 -- Add reference to RNG Schema document -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/184

<fjh> ACTION:fjh check generic hybrid cipher RNG section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]

<fjh> ACTION: fjh to check generic hybrid cipher RNG section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-530 - Check generic hybrid cipher RNG section [on Frederick Hirsch - due 2010-03-02].

<fjh> issue-185?

<trackbot> ISSUE-185 -- Why isn't processContents="lax" specified for <xsd:any> within the dcl of CanonicalizationMethodType and that of SignatureMethodType? -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/185

<fjh> discussed, noted we cannot change existing schema

<fjh> issue-185 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-185 Why isn't processContents="lax" specified for <xsd:any> within the dcl of CanonicalizationMethodType and that of SignatureMethodType? closed

<fjh> issue-186?

<trackbot> ISSUE-186 -- What is the normative content of section 5.4.2? (PBKDF2) -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/186

<tlr> ISSUE-185: resolved to close on 26 January

<trackbot> ISSUE-185 Why isn't processContents="lax" specified for <xsd:any> within the dcl of CanonicalizationMethodType and that of SignatureMethodType? notes added

<fjh> issue-186 in progress, Aldrin has action

<fjh> issue-186 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-186 What is the normative content of section 5.4.2? (PBKDF2) closed

tlr: to close 186 since we have an action item to cover it

<fjh> issue-187?

<trackbot> ISSUE-187 -- Last Call Issue - Retrieval Method schema and usability -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/187

<fjh> action-526?

<trackbot> ACTION-526 -- Frederick Hirsch to implement change agreed on 16 Feb for ISSUE-187 resolution -- due 2010-03-01 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/actions/526

<fjh> issue-187 closed

<trackbot> ISSUE-187 Last Call Issue - Retrieval Method schema and usability closed

<tlr> ISSUE-187: WG resolved to accept comment; change implemented

<trackbot> ISSUE-187 Last Call Issue - Retrieval Method schema and usability notes added

<fjh> issue-188?

<trackbot> ISSUE-188 -- Agreement referenced in XML Signature 1.1 but definition not clear -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/188

<Cynthia> I have a question for Thomas regarding his reference to developing an ID for the Security Algorithm references. Was it your intention to take up the eastlake ID again?

<Cynthia> Reference: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-eastlake-additional-xmlsec-uris-00.txt

<tlr> No; I was just planning to take the additional algorithms, but not do a full revision of 4051. Is there interest in the latter?

<Cynthia> Not sure, I will check around to see if anyone is interested in taking this on. I will let you know if I find anything.

<fjh> ACTION: tlr to review algorithms cross reference and update the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-531 - Review algorithms cross reference and update the document [on Thomas Roessler - due 2010-03-02].

<fjh> reminder - next week we plan to agree about publishing updated working drafts of XML Encryption 1.1, Generic Hybrid Ciphers, Canonical 2.0, XML Signature 2.0, Algorithm Cross Reference

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: fjh check generic hybrid cipher RNG section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: fjh to check generic hybrid cipher RNG section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: fjh to share pubrules info with pratik [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: magnus to review issue-188 related to xenc:Agreement referenced from XML Signature 1.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: pratik to add KeyInfoReference to Signature 2.0 (ISSUE-182) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: tlr to review algorithms cross reference and update the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-xmlsec-minutes.html#action06]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2010/03/02 15:09:46 $