[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: ODF 1.2 CD02 17.669 / 17.700 (protection-key)
When reading the newly added constructs for persisting passwords for e.g. protecting cell content, I noticed that in the corresponding schemas, both the attributes "protection-key" and "protection-key-digest-algorithm" are optional. To enhance interoperability and predictability between ODF implementations supporting these constructs, I suggest you add a normative reguirement that _if_ an application uses the "protection-key" attribute, the attribute "protection-key-digest-algorithm" _shall_ be used as well. Rationale: If you don't have any information about the algorithm used to create the digest, you are forced to iterate through a list of digest algorithms until you find one that matches. It would be much easier to simply use the algorithm-name and look that specific algorithm up in the "toolbox" of the implementation. Also (and this is the most important part), by making the protection-key-digest-algorithm a required attribute when using the "protection-key" attribute, you would force the applications to implement the normative requirements of this attribute, which is read-support for SHA1 and SHA256. This would greatly improve interoperability between applications using these document protection constructs since you could be certain that a FIPS180/NIST-approved digest algorithm was used I believe that RelaxNG supports constraints like this but if not, the prose should be changed to make the requirement normative. I hope you take this into consideration. -- Jesper Lund Stocholm www.idippedut.dk SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]