Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-27 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Friday, 27 October 2017 10:38:13 PDT Nash, George wrote: > I missed that the UUIDs are doubly encoded. I may add that issue to the > list. UUID can be send as 128 bytes no need to encode the string when it > already has a standard encoding. One of the major arguments for CBOR is > size if we ar

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-27 Thread Nash, George
D. George -Original Message- From: iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org [mailto:iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 6:41 PM To: iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org Subject: Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the secu

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-26 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 06:03:41 PDT Carsten Bormann wrote: > On Oct 26, 2017, at 03:40, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > Also note that COSE requires that the protected maps also conform to the > > canonical format (RFC 7049 section 3.9), but our map doesn't. > > Actually, COSE doesn’t require t

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-26 Thread Carsten Bormann
On Oct 26, 2017, at 03:40, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > Also note that COSE requires that the protected maps also conform to the > canonical format (RFC 7049 section 3.9), but our map doesn't. Actually, COSE doesn’t require that. The fact that we didn’t want to require canonicalization of the ma

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-26 Thread Wouter van der Beek (wovander)
e Sent: 25 October 2017 01:22 To: iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org> Subject: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder Summary of issues: Issue #1: Nesting cbor within cbor Issue #2: Adding to and changing the input *.json file

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-25 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Tuesday, 24 October 2017 17:21:54 PDT Nash, George wrote: > Summary of issues: > Issue #1: Nesting cbor within cbor Unfortunately, we're not alone. COSE (RFC 8152) also does that. I'm not sure why we've done it, but I can tell you COSE's reasoning: the portion of CBOR stored inside a CBOR Byt

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-25 Thread Nash, George
ber 2017 01:22 To: iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org> Subject: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder Summary of issues: Issue #1: Nesting cbor within cbor Issue #2: Adding to and changing the input *.json file Issue #3: Specia

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-25 Thread Nash, George
ling it special case. George From: iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org [mailto:iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf Of Nash, George Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:22 PM To: iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org Subject: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folde

Re: [dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-25 Thread Wouter van der Beek (wovander)
[dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder Summary of issues: Issue #1: Nesting cbor within cbor Issue #2: Adding to and changing the input *.json file Issue #3: Special handling of the "data" value from the "privatedata", "publicdata", and &quo

[dev] Questions about json2cbor tool from the security tools folder

2017-10-24 Thread Nash, George
Summary of issues: Issue #1: Nesting cbor within cbor Issue #2: Adding to and changing the input *.json file Issue #3: Special handling of the "data" value from the "privatedata", "publicdata", and "optionaldata". Is the output from the json2cbor tool supposed to produce 100% valid cbor accordin