update crypto suites to require at least ECDSA w/ P-256 and SHA-256 #295
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…256 for verifying signed artificats
awoie
requested review from
GarethCOliver,
Sakurann,
bc-pi,
jogu,
leecam,
martijnharing,
paulbastian,
tlodderstedt and
tplooker
jogu
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
…y ecosystems; just additional ones
jogu
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2025
javereec
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Co-authored-by: Jan Vereecken <ciao@janvereecken.com>
javereec
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
|
|
||
| The hash algorithm SHA-256 MUST be supported by all the entities to generate and validate the digests in the IETF SD-JWT VC and ISO mdoc. | ||
|
|
||
| Although support for the above algorithm is mandatory, an Issuer, Verifier, or Wallet MAY reject a particular hashing algorithm or the corresponding protected artifact if there are reasonable security, privacy, or policy concerns (e.g., suspected compromise or non-compliance). Such decisions are out of scope of the algorithm requirements but can be necessary in real-world deployments. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think these requirements should apply to Crypto Suites section too? reads like they apply only to Hash Algorithms section?
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have the same section in both places. I suggest to refactor the sections and structure on crypto suites/hashing algorithms once this PR got merged. I don't think the current structure is great. IMO, most of the requirements should go into the specific flows and/or credential formats sections instead of having dedicated crypto suite and hashing algorithm sections. We did the same thing for ECDH-ES with P-256 and A128GCM for instance.
This follow up PR would be fully editorial and can be done during the review period for this reason.
awoie
changed the title
awoie
commented
Oct 2, 2025
awoie
commented
Oct 2, 2025
awoie
commented
Oct 2, 2025
Co-authored-by: Jan Vereecken <ciao@janvereecken.com>
Co-authored-by: Oliver Terbu <oliver.terbu@mattr.global>
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Co-authored-by: Oliver Terbu <oliver.terbu@mattr.global>
Co-authored-by: Oliver Terbu <oliver.terbu@mattr.global>
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Sakurann
reviewed
Oct 2, 2025
Sakurann
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2025
javereec
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2025
paulbastian
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.