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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Why are some of the attestation interfaces [SecureContext] while others are not? #286

Closed
bzbarsky opened this issue Nov 4, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Why are some of the attestation interfaces [SecureContext] while others are not? #286

bzbarsky opened this issue Nov 4, 2016 · 3 comments
Assignees
@leshi
Labels
type:technical
Milestone
WD-04

Comments

@bzbarsky
Copy link

bzbarsky commented Nov 4, 2016

I would expect them all to be SecureContext or all to not be SecureContext.
@equalsJeffH equalsJeffH modified the milestones: WD-03, WD-04 Nov 7, 2016
@equalsJeffH
Copy link
Contributor

heh, good catch. offhand, I think those two interfaces were merged-in after I went through and applied [SecureContext] to all interfaces (per @mikewest).

@vijaybh
Copy link
Contributor

vijaybh commented Nov 7, 2016

This should be addressed by #244 which aims to make attestation an ArrayBuffer.

@equalsJeffH
Copy link
Contributor

Assigning @leshi since he is presently tackling #244

vijaybh added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 11, 2017
@vijaybh
Proofreading fixes, finish attestation cleanup
03cf327 
Fixed small wording and markdown issues. This completes the changes to
make attestation opaque to UAs, which fixes #286, fixes #287, and fixes
#289. It also fixes #239 by removing the homegrown algorithm identifiers
and specifying the algorithm explicitly in attestation data using JWK
identifiers. It also fixes #240 by encoding keys in CBOR which specifies
lengths of fields.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@leshi leshi

Labels
type:technical
Projects
None yet
Milestone
WD-04
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@equalsJeffH @leshi @bzbarsky @vijaybh