26311 2014-07-11 16:15:55 +0000 Algorithm names should be enforced to be ASCII and normalized to lowercase 2014-09-26 18:21:29 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified Web Cryptography Web Cryptography API Document unspecified PC All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 26536 1 bzbarsky watsonm public-webcrypto ttaubert watsonm oldest_to_newest 108862 0 bzbarsky 2014-07-11 16:15:55 +0000 See https://twitter.com/sleevi_/status/487625474156146688 109649 1 ttaubert 2014-07-31 13:25:29 +0000 We should probably rather normalize algorithm names to uppercase - users might be very surprised when their algorithm names are converted to lowercase, contrary to what is written in the spec. The only problem would be "RSAES-PKCS1-v1_5" which is written with a lowercase "v" in the spec as well. Normalizing it to uppercase be rather surprising as well... 109657 2 ttaubert 2014-07-31 14:02:27 +0000 Make that RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 as RSAES-PKCS1-v1_5 was removed. 109660 3 ttaubert 2014-07-31 14:08:42 +0000 If the spec would require algorithm names to be normalized as written in the spec, implementers could convert to uppercase and add special rules for mixed-case algorithm names. That seems like the least surprising way to handle this. 109690 4 sleevi 2014-07-31 18:22:52 +0000 (In reply to Tim Taubert from comment #3) > If the spec would require algorithm names to be normalized as written in the > spec, implementers could convert to uppercase and add special rules for > mixed-case algorithm names. That seems like the least surprising way to > handle this. I don't think we need to special case anything. The point of normalization was to ensure that every algorithm had a single 'canonical' form following normalization. We can make this normalized form 'spec-written'. The only meaningful thing was to make sure that the comparisons were (as an implementer) made in a case-insensitive manner (which this bug was about it having been dropped, accidentally) 110019 5 ttaubert 2014-08-07 09:51:38 +0000 (In reply to Ryan Sleevi from comment #4) > We can make this normalized form 'spec-written'. The only meaningful thing > was to make sure that the comparisons were (as an implementer) made in a > case-insensitive manner (which this bug was about it having been dropped, > accidentally) Yes, that sounds great. I was a little too focused on implementation here, sorry. 111956 6 watsonm 2014-09-22 17:58:16 +0000 The specification currently says nothing about performing any case conversions on algorithm names (that I could find). String comparisons are case-sensitive. Do we want to re-instate case-insensitive comparison (and normalization to 'standard' names as written in the specification) or shall we live with what we have in the specification now ? 111959 7 bzbarsky 2014-09-22 17:59:30 +0000 Please see comment 0. Apparently the current specification text is an editorial mistake, and doesn't match implementations or specification intent. 112257 8 watsonm 2014-09-26 15:16:12 +0000 Ok, so the change required here is in the algorithm normalization, which should perform case-insensitive matching on algorithm name and then normalize the name to the value registered by the algorithm. 112258 9 bzbarsky 2014-09-26 15:16:51 +0000 Please make sure it's ascii-case-insensitive matching? 112259 10 watsonm 2014-09-26 15:32:04 +0000 Do you have a specific reference in mind for the definition of case-insensitive match ? 112260 11 bzbarsky 2014-09-26 15:33:59 +0000 https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/infrastructure.html#ascii-case-insensitive 112292 12 watsonm 2014-09-26 18:21:29 +0000 https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/rev/08636b084b31