Hello,

Section 7.5.1 of RFC 8555 states the client sends an empty JSON body POST
request to the challenge URL to confirm it's ready for validation. This
seems, perhaps, overly restrictive, and certainly inefficient for
authorization types that are able to produce a valid challenge response at
the same time the challenge is accepted, such as the case with a
permanent-identifier from a TPM, HSM or other device with attestation
capabilities.

You can see this thread for more context:
jeremyhahn/go-trusted-platform#2
<https://github.com/jeremyhahn/go-trusted-platform/issues/2>

Another issue I encountered worth mentioning (but not as important to me):
The base64 encoding scheme in RFC 8555 seems incompatible with the JOSE
standard - more specifically, the issue arises because the ACME RFC 8555
expects only the entire protected, payload, and signature fields to be
base64url-encoded in the final JOSE object—not each individual element
inside them. However, in typical JOSE implementations, each part, like the
protected header, is often base64url-encoded before being embedded in the
JOSE object. Therefore, ACME expects base64url encoding only on the
outermost components, while traditional JOSE implementations may encode
internal components as well, causing a mismatch.

This mismatch is inconvenient in modern applications based on JOSE and
leads to having to maintain two different libraries for serialization and
signing.

Feedback?

Thanks
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list -- acme@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to acme-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to