RFR[11] JDK-8146293 "Add Support for RSA-PSS Signature Algorithm as in PKCS#1 v2.2"

Valerie Peng valerie.peng at oracle.com
Fri Apr 27 23:41:58 UTC 2018


I'd also strongly prefer to pick one as standard name for RSA PSS 
signature and use it consistently.

Here are the possible choices for RSA PSS standard names:

 1. RSA-PSS
 2. RSASSA-PSS
 3. RSA/PSS
 4. RSAPSS

#1,#2 are from 3rd party provider, #3 is what I have in current webrev, 
#4 is just a new alternative in case people may prefer it over #1.

My preference is #1, #2, and #4. My reason for steering away from #3 is 
due to that "/" is used by Cipher transformation string. Though 
Signature algorithm is separate from Cipher transformation, but RSA can 
be used for encryption and having that "/" is potentially very confusing.

Comments? Please share your preference soon so I can update the webrev 
accordingly...

Thanks,
Valerie

On 4/18/2018 11:36 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> On 4/18/2018 11:25 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> On 4/18/18 12:52 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>>> The algorithm name decomposer implementation for algorithm 
>>> restrictions depends on the pattern:
>>>     <digest>with<encryption>
>>>
>>> Using the same "encryption" name for signature and PKCS#1 could be 
>>> easier for applications if there is a need  to decompose the 
>>> algorithms.
>>
>> Hmm, so do you mean this is a problem if you specify the signature 
>> algorithm as "RSA-PSS" and require that the digest algorithm be 
>> specified as a parameter to the API? Or something else? Not sure I 
>> understand you but I have a feeling you are raising a good point ...
>>
> The concern is from the names BC and Andriod used:
>
>      SHA*withRSA/PSS
>      RSASSA-PSS (name from PKCS#1)
>
> The signature algorithm decomposing SHA*withRSA/PSS and "SHA*" and 
> "RSA/PSS".  If the PKCS#1 name use "RSASSA-PSS", it is tricky to map 
> "RSA/PSS" to "RSASSA-PSS".  I'm suggesting use a consistent name. 
> Either "SHA*withRSA/PSS"/"RSA/PSS" or "SHA*withRSASSA-PSS"/"RSASSA-PSS".
>
> Xuelei
>
>> --Sean
>>
>>>
>>> Xuelei
>>>
>>> On 4/16/2018 11:40 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
>>>> On 4/13/18 3:25 PM, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
>>>>> SunRsaSignEntries.java
>>>>> ----------------------
>>>>> 145:  Where did you come up with this convention for your aliases?
>>>>>
>>>>>      SHA1withRSA-PSS
>>>>>
>>>>> I see Bouncy Castle[1] and Android[2] are both using:
>>>>>
>>>>>      SHA*withRSA/PSS
>>>>>      RSASSA-PSS (name from PKCS#1)
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] 
>>>>> https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/blob/master/prov/src/main/java/org/bouncycastle/jcajce/provider/asymmetric/RSA.java 
>>>>>
>>>>> [2] 
>>>>> https://developer.android.com/reference/java/security/Signature.html
>>>>>
>>>>> but we have neither style.
>>>>
>>>> Since these standard names have not yet been defined, we don't 
>>>> necessarily have to be consistent, but I don't see a good enough 
>>>> reason for us to name them differently, so to help with 
>>>> compatibility I would go with the names above.
>>>>
>>>> --Sean

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/attachments/20180427/1fa33c75/attachment.html>


More information about the security-dev mailing list