<weiler> scribenick: weiler
emil will delete one bullet and merge
merge it.
wait for jeff to sign off; emil will then merge
<jfontana> I can scribe
giri: why is alg separated from data being returned by authenticator?
<scribe> scribenick: jfontana
tony: don't know the answer, to
gmandyam question
... if some attestation fo not carry it why would we care?
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/956
replaces #842
elundberg: most of th commits are still in here. we want it broken out
selfissue: there are huge number of changes, seems like re-write
tony: last week we asked for this to be re-done
jeffH: I think this is reasonable. needs polish and to ship
elundberg: if you approved #842 then the commits from there are in here.
jeffH: I have done detailed review.
selfissue: if you know what changed you have my proxie
<jeffh> https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/956#issuecomment-398683756
elundberg: i added a link to the changes I add on top of previous PR selfissue approved
slefissue: let me look at the
diffs
... this seems fine, thanks for the diff
elundberg: still work in
progress, collaborating with JeffH
... other things to do
selfissue: what?
elundberg: previous PR has lots of comments.
selfissue: can we finish this shortly, the big PRs are harder to review.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/961
tony: jeffH is a reviewer
jeffH: should I merge.
tony: yes.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/962
tony: do we have anyone from Google?
silence
tony: I guess not
... do we need emil to do this if jeffH approves
... do we need sign off
elundberg: yes, and I can merge if that comes through.
tony: jeffH and one of the google
guys
... let's go back to #951
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/951
tony: akshay have you looked
akshay: I don't think I am the
right expert for this.
... angelo
tony: I am adding angelo
the number is 951
tony: any other Pull requests to
talk about?
... we have 501
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/501
jeffH: we might want to provide link to sample code
angelo: this PR is really big, has many changes. I would rather not touch this anymore. I will open another
jeffH: to add a link
angelo: yes.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/878
jeffH: this will give way to
951
... can the chair reach out to Mozilla and tug sleeves
... someone should be here to cover for mozilla
tony: I can reach out.
JeffH: thanks
angelo: I was just looking at the spec, in the use cases section there is reference to sample code
tony: so you can close?
close no action
angelo: yes, I just closed it
tony: go to issues.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/873
jeffH: sitll on my list
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/950
tony: this is still open
elundberg: the PR only address part of this issue
tony: can yo split this one out?
apowers: yes
tony: keep this one for a reference. and we will look at the new one.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/963
jeffH: we have to review this.
tony: assign jeffH?
jeffH: yes
tony: leaves us with two un-triaged; on to issues.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/334
angelo: we discussed this.. we have a use case section that does address where we are going.
tony: so I will ask christiaan to review. if no longer needed, close it
jeffH: this should be referenced by 956
#956
jefH: we have use cases in many places including #956. We have to agree on the use cases before we do anything
tony: OK, let's go to review on #334
christiaan: maybe. we should review
tony: Look at and put in your comments
christiaan: OK
... I thought this could be addressed separately and not in
this spec
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/349
angelo: On this one, CTAP spec is ready. do we need to do this?
akshay: I don't think we need it
angelo: close
akshay: yes.
jeffH: actually, I wouldn't close
this, or I will have to re-open.
... we hav tlalked to browser makers lately and there are
usability issues. this would be helpful to do this.
akshay: you can't have this if the authenticator is not there.
jeffH: we really want to go to
passwordless
... so when we say user verifying, we want to say
fingerprint
... we don't think it is good user experience to fall back to
PIN
tony: that is preference on your part.
jeffH: I am letting you know
akshay: the situations where you say fingerpirnt is good, others bad, there wil be extention
JeffH: the user experience flows
are sub-optimal
... our product people will talk to you. I am channeling
now
akshay: you are saying...
jeffH: I thing specifically
fingerprint, we want passwordless experiene, with fingerprint
only.
... talk to them
... biometrics good. passphrase, PIN out.
... people convert to fingerprint
akshay: we should talk more.
jeffH: agreed
jbradley: what if there was platform authenticator on......that did not have FP reader
jeffH: I don't know what we would do diffferntly
akshay: lets address in V2
jeffH: we will reach out to you
tony: I can tell you this won't make the dates.
jeffH: leave open and put new
dates on this
... we can open a new issue with this request
<weiler> scribenick: weiler
akshay: jeff will you open new issue? close this one.
angelo: we're returning null today. not sure re: chrome. interop in a month... might answer this?
selfissued: reminder that
substantive changes need to go in fast because of W3C IPR
rules.
... ~1 week
angelo: I'll accellerate this.
giri: is this big enough?
[we haven't looked at this one in depth]
sam: angelo, can you resolve this in the next week?
angelo: probably.
jfontana: we need to confirm whether this needs to be included in the new CR
sam: adding myself as assignee to answer that
<jeffh> https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/837#issuecomment-373114084
sam: try opening a PR to https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed/tree/master/bikeshed/boilerplate/webauthn
jfontana: plan on meeting next
week, given the timeline
... and July 4 the week after
... despite Identiverse.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152 of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Present: elundberg wseltzer gmandyam weiler jeffh apowers akshay nadalin selfissued jfontana angelo christiaan JohnBradley Found ScribeNick: weiler Found ScribeNick: jfontana Found ScribeNick: weiler Inferring Scribes: weiler, jfontana Scribes: weiler, jfontana ScribeNicks: weiler, jfontana Found Date: 20 Jun 2018 People with action items: WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]