IRC log of crypto on 2013-01-07

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:55:54 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #crypto
19:55:54 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:56:23 [mountie]
mountie has joined #crypto
19:56:54 [asad]
asad has joined #crypto
19:57:45 [wseltzer]
wseltzer has changed the topic to: Meeting: Monday at 2000 UTC
19:58:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #crypto
19:58:53 [wseltzer]
trackbot, prepare teleconf
19:58:55 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:58:57 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SEC_WebCryp
19:58:57 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see SEC_WebCryp()3:00PM already started
19:58:58 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Cryptography Working Group Teleconference
19:58:58 [trackbot]
Date: 07 January 2013
19:59:18 [Zakim]
+ +1.410.290.aacc
19:59:34 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.257.aadd
19:59:37 [markw]
markw has joined #crypto
19:59:50 [virginie]
Zakim, what is the conference code?
19:59:50 [Zakim]
the conference code is 27978 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, virginie
19:59:53 [rbarnes]
rbarnes has joined #crypto
20:00:02 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.540.aaee
20:00:03 [rbarnes]
hello world!
20:00:10 [rbarnes]
zakim, who is on the phone?
20:00:10 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.720.357.aaaa, +, +1.410.290.aacc, +1.512.257.aadd, +1.408.540.aaee
20:00:10 [markw]
Zakim, aaee is markw
20:00:13 [Zakim]
+markw; got it
20:00:24 [rbarnes]
zakim, aacc is rbarnes
20:00:24 [Zakim]
+rbarnes; got it
20:00:28 [asad]
zakim, aadd is asad
20:00:28 [Zakim]
+asad; got it
20:00:30 [ddahl]
ddahl has joined #crypto
20:00:40 [rbarnes]
asad: zakim almost got your name right!
20:00:56 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.257.aaff
20:01:15 [virginie]
zakim, who is on the phone?
20:01:15 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.720.357.aaaa, +, rbarnes, asad, markw, +1.512.257.aaff
20:01:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.257.aagg
20:01:32 [virginie]
Zakim, aaff is me
20:01:32 [Zakim]
+virginie; got it
20:01:34 [hhalpin]
Zakim, what's the code?
20:01:34 [Zakim]
the conference code is 27978 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, hhalpin
20:01:41 [virginie]
zakim, who is on the phone?
20:01:41 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.720.357.aaaa, +, rbarnes, asad, markw, virginie, +1.512.257.aagg
20:01:49 [Zakim]
20:01:52 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.458.aahh
20:02:00 [Zakim]
20:02:02 [Zakim]
20:02:08 [hhalpin]
Zakim, IPcaller is hhalpin
20:02:08 [Zakim]
+hhalpin; got it
20:02:14 [virginie]
zakim, who is on the phone?
20:02:14 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +1.720.357.aaaa, +, rbarnes, asad, markw, virginie, +1.512.257.aagg, ddahl, +1.408.458.aahh, Wendy, hhalpin
20:02:20 [Zakim]
20:02:31 [karen]
karen has joined #crypto
20:02:56 [wseltzer]
zakim, Google has rsleevi
20:02:56 [Zakim]
+rsleevi; got it
20:03:09 [virginie]
agenda+ Welcome
20:03:14 [mountie]
Zakim, aaaa is mountie
20:03:14 [Zakim]
+mountie; got it
20:03:25 [virginie]
agenda+ implementations plan for our APIs
20:03:39 [wseltzer]
zakim, mountie is aaaa
20:03:39 [Zakim]
+aaaa; got it
20:03:39 [virginie]
agenda F2F meeting date and location
20:03:45 [mountie]
Zakim, aabb is mountie
20:03:45 [Zakim]
+mountie; got it
20:03:47 [virginie]
agenda+ AOB
20:03:51 [wseltzer]
zakim, aabb is mountie
20:03:51 [Zakim]
sorry, wseltzer, I do not recognize a party named 'aabb'
20:03:53 [virginie]
20:04:07 [mountie]
zakim, who is on the phone?
20:04:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aaaa, mountie, rbarnes, asad, markw, virginie, +1.512.257.aagg, ddahl, +1.408.458.aahh, Wendy, hhalpin, Google
20:04:09 [Zakim]
Google has rsleevi
20:04:10 [virginie]
agenda+ F2F meeting date and location
20:04:15 [virginie]
20:04:50 [wseltzer]
zakim, aaaa is Zooko
20:04:50 [Zakim]
+Zooko; got it
20:04:56 [karen]
aagg is Karen
20:05:01 [wseltzer]
zakim, aagg is Karen
20:05:01 [Zakim]
+Karen; got it
20:06:12 [Zakim]
20:06:47 [selfissued]
selfissued has joined #crypto
20:06:53 [rsleevi]
I can scribe
20:07:04 [rsleevi]
scribenick: rsleevi
20:07:36 [virginie]
20:07:40 [rsleevi]
Zakim, take up agendum 1
20:07:40 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Welcome" taken up [from virginie]
20:08:09 [rsleevi]
RESOLVED: Minutes from previous call are accepted
20:08:23 [rsleevi]
virginie: Status of documents in publication
20:08:47 [rsleevi]
...: Our decision was reached on Dec 17. However, that was when publication of specifications were frozen.
20:08:58 [hhalpin]
Everything is fine except the use-cases
20:09:19 [rsleevi]
... current drafts are working through publication. WebCrypto & Key Discovery were PubRules clean, so will be published tomorrow
20:09:24 [hhalpin]
Worse case, use-cases can come out a bit later...
20:09:32 [rsleevi]
... use cases still needs a few editorial tweaks for pubrules
20:10:00 [rsleevi]
?? Question about origin and why definition was removed
20:10:07 [hhalpin]
20:10:38 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: Not sure I understand the question
20:11:04 [rsleevi]
mountie: Differences make note about multi-origin support
20:12:31 [hhalpin]
20:13:17 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: There was some discussion about multi-origin related to key discovery, that was removed during the key discovery separation. Not fully sure I understand the question, but that may have been the reason for removal
20:13:34 [rbarnes]
20:13:43 [virginie]
ack hhalpin
20:13:46 [zooko]
zooko has joined #crypto
20:13:56 [rbarnes]
20:14:27 [rsleevi]
hhalpin: Multi-origin may have a use case. Should send the use case. It may be possible to do things for the Korean banking use case while respecting the same-origin policy
20:14:40 [hhalpin]
i.e. by using digital signatures
20:14:55 [Zakim]
+ +1.303.661.aaii
20:15:01 [sdurbha]
sdurbha has joined #crypto
20:15:09 [hhalpin]
i.e. a certificate (token) can be given and have its signature verified
20:15:09 [wseltzer]
zakim, aaii is sdurbha
20:15:09 [Zakim]
+sdurbha; got it
20:15:16 [virginie]
20:15:31 [hhalpin]
even if the user is not currently "visiting" the site with a key from the same-origin as the origin that signed the token.
20:15:41 [Zakim]
+ +1.303.543.aajj
20:15:48 [zooko]
Zakim: aajj is zooko
20:15:50 [rsleevi]
virginie: Status of high level API - ddahl, markw, et al need more time to work on it
20:15:56 [Zakim]
20:16:12 [rsleevi]
Zakim, next agendum
20:16:12 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "implementations plan for our APIs" taken up [from virginie]
20:16:38 [hhalpin]
20:16:43 [rsleevi]
virginie: Question is "When are we going to have implementations" and "When are we going to get feedback about the API and the issues highlighted"
20:16:46 [rbarnes]
20:16:53 [hhalpin]
20:17:07 [rsleevi]
... Question impacts timing of LC and schedule of WG
20:17:09 [hhalpin]
Yes, I was just going to note we need to tell W3C when we hope to go to Last Call.
20:17:13 [rbarnes]
20:17:34 [hhalpin]
+1 rbarnes!!!
20:17:38 [rsleevi]
rbarnes: Has just this afternoon pushed a polyfill out to github
20:17:39 [rbarnes]
20:17:57 [rsleevi]
... This version implements several different algorithms, most of the API.
20:18:02 [rsleevi]
... missing some of export key
20:18:13 [rsleevi]
... Test cases driven by test vectors
20:18:40 [rsleevi]
... Grep through the source for XXX spec for spec issues
20:18:51 [rbarnes]
grep -R "XXX-SPEC" *
20:19:02 [virginie]
20:19:06 [rbarnes]
20:19:24 [rsleevi]
rbarnes: While implementing, came across a few inconsistencies (eg: key usage vs key usageS )
20:19:40 [rsleevi]
... will be providing feedback on the spec, and looking for feedback on the implementation
20:20:27 [rsleevi]
ddahl: Ongoing work, mostly infrastructural. Still trying to work out resources and timelines, not sure when he'll have details
20:20:33 [hhalpin]
we'll need info on updating the charter within 2 weeks, BTW
20:21:12 [rsleevi]
selfissued: No implementation to report at this time
20:21:16 [Zakim]
20:21:25 [hhalpin]
we want to make the roadmap realistic for all parties!
20:21:26 [Zakim]
- +1.303.543.aajj
20:21:29 [rsleevi]
virginie: Any information we should request of Microsoft before we establish our roadmap?
20:21:40 [hhalpin]
20:21:45 [rsleevi]
selfissued: Ask that question again in two weeks
20:22:39 [markw]
20:22:57 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: Not sure I can comment on timing. Have portions of the API (such as random) implemented in WK already, still working on resources and timing
20:23:40 [rsleevi]
markw: We have an implementation of a subset of the API, in the form of a plugin at the moment. Question about when we plan to have this aligned with the API, will get back
20:24:26 [rsleevi]
hhalpin: Not asking for anyone to reveal anything confidential.
20:24:43 [rsleevi]
... Mostly trying to get an idea of the WG and when we as a WG expect to enter LC with all of our issues closed
20:25:05 [rsleevi]
... when we chartered, we set a timeframe. We can realistically ask for one extension of timing
20:25:37 [rsleevi]
... we have ourselves entering LC in February
20:25:40 [rsleevi]
20:25:50 [virginie]
ack hhalpin
20:26:02 [markw]
20:27:00 [selfissued]
20:27:10 [selfissued]
I can respond if I do it now, but I have to go in about 2 minutes
20:27:25 [markw]
20:27:36 [wseltzer]
ack rsleevi
20:27:39 [wseltzer]
ack selfissued
20:27:52 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: An area of concern is key import/export and key wrap/unwrap and the timing and deliverables of those
20:28:18 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: Options include 1) Drop the feature 2) Do our own thing 3) Do the JOSE thing if it's ready
20:28:48 [rsleevi]
selfissued: JOSE has taken it up, and has progressed on something based on JWE, and is being responsive
20:29:02 [Zakim]
20:29:48 [rsleevi]
markw: Sense was use JOSE as the base, but if for any reason it wasn't ready, we cut & paste into our own
20:30:09 [rsleevi]
... What are the next steps for key wrapping / unwrapping?
20:30:22 [markw]
20:31:06 [rsleevi]
virginie: We will need to make a decision and better understand the timing of decision. We can't delay it past LC
20:31:23 [rsleevi]
... Regarding key wrapping / unwrapping, have it as an item for the next call
20:32:07 [rsleevi]
markw: Ideally we could have some progress before then
20:32:15 [hhalpin]
I'm trying to remember what open issues were with MarkW's key wrapping proposal.
20:32:31 [rsleevi]
virginie: We can't force people to work on that part of the spec. By adding it to the agenda we can discuss it
20:32:31 [hhalpin]
I think we still wanted the feature...
20:33:24 [rsleevi]
markw: Will update the proposal based on the new API, will go from there
20:33:44 [virginie]
20:33:50 [rsleevi]
20:34:44 [virginie]
acl rsleevi
20:34:50 [markw]
@hhalpin: yes ... I can't remember what the issues were either ;-) But at least the proposal needs to be updated for the API changes. There were also two versions: overloading import/export vs explicit wrap/unwrap & I think the group feeling was towards the latter
20:35:02 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: Reminder to think about cloning cryptographic operations and whether we accept or drop the feature
20:35:04 [virginie]
ack rsleevi
20:35:45 [rsleevi]
Zakim, take up agendum 4
20:35:45 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "F2F meeting date and location" taken up [from virginie]
20:36:00 [virginie]
March 26/27/28
20:36:07 [rsleevi]
Most favourable dates were the end of March - 26/27/28
20:36:30 [rsleevi]
virginie: Question raised was "End of March - will we have enough feedback to sustain a F2F"
20:37:00 [rsleevi]
... As a chair, feeling is meeting is always good, but people have budgets and timing concerns
20:37:09 [rsleevi]
... Was thinking two F2F - one in march and one some time in summer
20:37:17 [virginie]
20:38:04 [hhalpin]
20:38:27 [rsleevi]
hhalpin: Some feeling from the editors was that delaying it may help
20:38:35 [rsleevi]
... delaying a month or a little more won't hurt
20:39:15 [rsleevi]
... options for a meeting in Korea was raised. W3C meeting is having a fall meeting in China. Spec may still be in LC or CR phase
20:39:26 [rsleevi]
... not sure if the China location would be suitably proximate
20:39:42 [hhalpin]
TPAC 2013 is in china
20:40:05 [rsleevi]
virginie: For me, because we only have a few members in the WG in Korea, but we have many in the US, it may make more sense to have this meeting in the US
20:40:34 [hhalpin]
and in the fall we could arrange a visit to Korea as well after or before TPAC
20:40:38 [rsleevi]
virginie: Very likely that the next meeting is in the US
20:41:16 [rsleevi]
mountie: Want to have the next meeting in Korea in order to show why there is interest in this API
20:42:42 [virginie]
ack hhalpin
20:42:53 [rsleevi]
hhalpin: Mentioning of China was to explore the possibility to have meeting in Korea before/after.
20:43:09 [rsleevi]
... We may still have time for flexibility in the API at that time
20:43:31 [rsleevi]
... we may be better served by waiting for the spec to be more mature
20:43:41 [hhalpin]
but would that be too late to influence stuff in Korea?
20:44:50 [virginie]
20:45:01 [virginie]
ack rsleevi
20:45:17 [hhalpin]
That's why I'm thinking the overlap will be clearer by the fall in 2013
20:45:38 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: As an implementor, while we value the problem, it's not a high point for us or our users. We've studied this problem for quite a bit of time, and with quite a bit of depth, and think this problem is much larger
20:45:56 [rsleevi]
... as an editor, fully happy to reflect the consensus from the WG, but it's not likely something we'd rush to implement
20:46:23 [rsleevi]
... would recommend this problem be postponed until we've furthered the current work
20:47:14 [rsleevi]
hhalpin: If we do it at TPAC, we'll have more contributors available
20:47:29 [rsleevi]
virginie: Other possibilities include a "roadshow" to demonstrate the API and how it fits in with the use case
20:47:37 [rsleevi]
... back to the topic of dates
20:47:45 [rsleevi]
20:47:57 [virginie]
ack virginie
20:49:13 [hhalpin]
There is a distinct lack of proposals (except from Netflix!!)
20:49:25 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: Main concern is making we have enough issues and agenda for discussion
20:49:30 [mountie]
20:49:39 [rsleevi]
20:49:55 [rsleevi]
virginie: We have lots of specs at the moment - we have use cases, key discovery, and (hopefully soon) high level API
20:50:00 [hhalpin]
I'd say we could also aim for April 2nd.
20:50:05 [hhalpin]
That would give us more time.
20:50:28 [hhalpin]
That is in the Doodle.
20:50:31 [rsleevi]
... goal is to make sure we have people willing to travel and discuss the issues for these related specs
20:51:36 [rsleevi]
mountie: My expectation of the next F2F meeting was that we could begin setting priorities for the list of secondary features
20:51:58 [rsleevi]
... our preferences are for secondary features. We should set priorities for secondary features
20:52:04 [hhalpin]
I agree with Mountie re prioritizing secondary features
20:52:57 [rsleevi]
virginie: Some of the secondary features may have dependencies on the primary dependency
20:53:15 [rsleevi]
... we really have to balance on making sure we don't focus on our secondary features before focusing on our primary features
20:53:29 [rbarnes]
i am willing to travel, especially in US
20:53:35 [ddahl]
20:53:35 [virginie]
20:53:37 [hhalpin]
20:53:39 [asad]
20:53:40 [markw]
20:53:42 [karen]
+1 in US
20:53:50 [rsleevi]
virginie: Question is who is willing and has the budget to travel
20:53:57 [rsleevi]
virginie: Reminder: Another F2F possibly in the summer
20:53:58 [wseltzer]
20:55:39 [rsleevi]
virginie: Within the next two weeks, proposals for WHERE and WHEN the next F2F will be. As mentioned, will be US based
20:55:52 [rsleevi]
virginie: Possibility of Boston or DC as one options
20:56:06 [rsleevi]
ddahl: Possibility of Mountain View/Vancouver/Toronto
20:56:46 [rsleevi]
Zakim, take up agendum 3
20:56:46 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "AOB" taken up [from virginie]
20:57:07 [zooko]
Thanks folks!
20:57:17 [rsleevi]
20:57:26 [hhalpin]
zooko - I'll look into the disposition of comments point I brought up.
20:57:29 [virginie]
ack mountie
20:57:31 [wseltzer]
ack mountie
20:57:32 [mountie]
20:57:34 [wseltzer]
ack rsleevi
20:57:46 [zooko]
I'm going to the Stanford Real World Crypto workshop!
20:57:55 [hhalpin]
If folks can go and present the API at that workshop, that would be great!!
20:57:56 [zooko]
Can we have a WebCrypto dinner/lunch/beer ?
20:58:27 [zooko]
Who is it that *might* be presenting something related to WebCrypto there?
20:58:30 [rsleevi]
@hhalpin: No presentation
20:58:41 [rsleevi]
@zooko: ben adida. ddahl was supposed to figure out the details ;)
20:59:07 [zooko]
I see:
20:59:08 [rsleevi]
rsleevi: Mentioned the Stanford Real World Crypto Workshop, opportunity to get feedback and discuss with crypto community
20:59:43 [rsleevi]
virginie: Next call topic will include getting feedback from more companies and communities
20:59:44 [ddahl]
rsleevi: you should just ping ben, he will let you know what is going on
20:59:48 [zooko]
Okay! Let's discuss it on this IRC channel after the call?
20:59:48 [hhalpin]
Get Terrence to look at it.
20:59:57 [Zakim]
21:00:01 [Zakim]
- +1.408.458.aahh
21:00:02 [Zakim]
21:00:03 [Zakim]
21:00:03 [Zakim]
21:00:05 [Zakim]
21:00:05 [Zakim]
21:00:06 [Zakim]
21:00:07 [Zakim]
21:00:08 [Zakim]
21:00:09 [Zakim]
21:00:15 [Zakim]
21:00:29 [rsleevi]
Zakim, draft minutes
21:00:29 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'draft minutes', rsleevi
21:00:47 [Zakim]
21:00:48 [Zakim]
SEC_WebCryp()3:00PM has ended
21:00:48 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.720.357.aaaa, +, +1.410.290.aacc, +1.512.257.aadd, +1.408.540.aaee, markw, rbarnes, asad, +1.512.257.aaff, +1.512.257.aagg, virginie, ddahl,
21:00:48 [Zakim]
... +1.408.458.aahh, Wendy, hhalpin, rsleevi, mountie, Zooko, Karen, Mike_Jones, +1.303.661.aaii, sdurbha, +1.303.543.aajj
21:00:51 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, make minutes
21:00:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wseltzer
21:01:24 [zooko]
Actually... I need to take a break. I'll look for rsleevi et al. on this IRC channel, twitter, email, etc. and talk about when we could meet up.
21:01:32 [zooko]
Yes, thanks rsleevi for scribing!
21:01:37 [zooko]
I hate that job...
21:01:43 [zooko]
Bye for now.
21:23:39 [mountie]
mountie has left #crypto
21:42:40 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #crypto
21:46:00 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #crypto