| Commit | Date | |
|---|---|---|
| 2010-02-06 01:46:27 | Tree | |
|
[r574]
by
antbryan
Lisa: Normally, a content creator is in the best position to know how strong the protective signing ought to be on their content. Thus, a content creator can choose weak or strong cryptography, and a content consumer would normally accept that. There MAY be applications where the content consumer chooses to reject weak cryptography, but that is not envisioned as the common use case. |
2010-02-06 01:41:47 | Tree |
|
[r573]
by
antbryan
Although signing and verifying signatures are both OPTIONAL, an implementation that supports either feature SHOULD implement RSA with a minimum key size of 2048 with SHA-256. Metalink Processors that support verifying signatures MUST reject Metalink Documents with invalid signatures. If weak cryptography is used in a Metalink Document, such as legacy or marginal algorithms or key sizes (i.e., MD5 or 512 bit RSA)... |
2010-02-05 23:02:55 | Tree |
| 2010-02-04 08:37:58 | Tree | |
| 2010-02-02 07:23:20 | Tree | |
|
[r570]
by
antbryan
Alexey: Metalink Processors that encounter foreign markup in a location that |
2010-01-31 01:50:30 | Tree |
| 2010-01-28 18:35:50 | Tree | |
| 2010-01-26 23:42:23 | Tree | |
| 2010-01-26 17:43:47 | Tree | |
| 2010-01-26 11:22:28 | Tree |