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

differentiate assertion signatures and attestation signatures #118

Closed
equalsJeffH opened this issue Jun 2, 2016 · 0 comments
Closed

differentiate assertion signatures and attestation signatures #118

equalsJeffH opened this issue Jun 2, 2016 · 0 comments
Labels
type:editorial
Milestone
WD-04

Comments

@equalsJeffH
Copy link
Contributor

presently the spec uses the unadorned term "signature" in ~80+ places. We have two overall types of signatures -- aka 'signed objects' -- attestations in the makeCredential() flow, and assertions in the getAssertion() flow. Perhaps we should name these two different signature types "assertion signature" and "attestation signature"
@equalsJeffH equalsJeffH added this to the CR milestone Jun 2, 2016
@equalsJeffH equalsJeffH modified the milestones: WD-04, CR Jan 4, 2017
vijaybh added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 10, 2017
@vijaybh
Many attestation and signature cleanups
b2ecda2 
Refactor the attestation section to clean up exposition. Separated out
signature verification (per format) from trust chaining (done at higher
layer).

Created a separate section for specifying key RP operations. Fixes #88.

RP registration section defines binding of credentials to user accounts.
Fixes #13.

RP registration section also defines options in case of registering the
same credential to different users. Fixes #12.

Cleans up and completes defining the process for verifying assertions,
which had already been largely done by @rlin1. Fixes #102.

Completes drawing the distinction between assertion and attestation
certificates. Fixes #118.

Replace "client platform" with "client" in signature format section to
avoid confusion. Fixes #209.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
type:editorial
Projects
None yet
Milestone
WD-04
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@equalsJeffH