Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add text description of OID in artifact names. #96

Open
johngray-dev opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Add text description of OID in artifact names. #96

johngray-dev opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@johngray-dev
Copy link
Collaborator

johngray-dev commented Feb 6, 2024

When looking at the artifacts in an artifact.zip file, it is difficult to know what the underlying algorithm is used unless you just happen to know the OID associated with that algorithm. It would be nice to have something like:

  • [OID]-[StringName].der so it was easier to quickly find samples of the desired algorithm type.
  • This has been mentioned a few times by various people using the project.
@danvangeest
Copy link
Collaborator

In the OID mapping table, the value which would be used by StringName would have dashes in it, e.g. "ML-DSA-44-ipd", so I think an underscore in the name is better, e.g [OID]_[StringName][OtherArtifactDifferentiators].der.

This is what I'll be doing in the forthcoming CMS artifacts.

@danvangeest
Copy link
Collaborator

Of course, right after writing this I realized that kyber512_shake has an underscore in it.

@johngray-dev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I agree, using the underscore is better since a lot of the algorithm names already have dashes in them.

@johngray-dev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

johngray-dev commented Jun 4, 2024

This should be done in the V4 format version. Need to decide which String name to use. We plan to use the OID list matrix and NIST standards (the pre-hash versions may-effect the name) and keep them aligned.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants
@danvangeest @johngray-dev and others