Hi all, I had a question related to the ongoing draft on device attestation [1], more specifically I was interested in the attestation statement formats and the new registry intended for them [2].
I was curious whether the plan is to keep closer ties and alignment with the W3C and their WebAuthentication spec, or whether the naming and references are just a way to simplify the groundwork, and subsequent statement formats will have virtually no relationship to the the original ones from WebAuthn. I'm asking this with a mind towards the reusability of these registries for other types of protocols (e.g., TLS [3]), but that'd be a follow-up discussion. Best wishes, Ionut [1] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bweeks-acme-device-attest-01.html [2] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bweeks-acme-device-attest-01.html#name-attestation-statement-forma [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-fossati-tls-attestation-01 IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
