Specification: DAG-JOSE
Status: Descriptive - Draft
JOSE is a standard for signing and encrypting JSON objects. The various specifications for JOSE can be found in the IETF datatracker.
Format
The are two kinds of JOSE objects: JWS (JSON web signature) and JWE (JSON web encryption). These two objects are primitives in JOSE and can be used to create JWT and JWM objects etc. The IETF RFCs specify a JSON encoding of JOSE objects. This specification maps the JSON encoding to CBOR. Upon encountering the dag-jose
multiformat implementations can be sure that the block contains dag-cbor encoded data which matches the IPLD schema we specify below.
Mapping from the JOSE general JSON serialization to dag-jose serialization
Both JWS and JWE supports three different serialization formats: Compact Serialization
, Flattened JSON Serialization
, and General JSON Serialization
. The first two are more concise, but they only allow for one recipient. Therefore DAG JOSE always uses the General Serialization
which ensures maximum compatibility with minimum ambiguity. Libraries implementing serialization should accept all JOSE formats including the Decoded Representation
(see below) and convert them if necessary.
To map the general JSON serialization to CBOR we do the following:
- Any field which is represented as
base64url(<data>)
we map directly toBytes
. For fields likeheader
andprotected
which are specified as thebase64url(ascii(<some json>))
that means that the value is theascii(<some json>)
bytes. - For JWS we specify that the
payload
property MAY be a CID, and we set thepayload
of the encoded JOSE object toBytes
containing the bytes of the CID. For applications where an additional network request to retrieve the linked content is undesirable then anidentity
multihash should be used. - Besides a CID the JWS
payload
can also be arbitrary JSON. We also support including CIDs inside of this json data. However, as opposed to dag-json we use strings containing an IPFS uriipfs://<cid>
, instead of an object{ "/": "<cid>" }
which is whatdag-json
does. - For JWE objects the
ciphertext
must decrypt to a cleartext which is the bytes of a CID. The same approach of using anidentity
multihash can be used, and most likely will be the only way to retain the confidentiality of data.
Below we present an IPLD schema representing the encoded JOSE objects. Note that there are two IPLD schemas, EncodedJWE
and EncodedJWS
. The actual wire format is a single struct which contains all the keys from both the EncodedJWE
and the EncodedJWS
structs, implementors should follow section 9 of the JWE spec and distinguish between these two branches by checking if the payload
attribute exists, and hence you have a JWS; or the ciphertext
attribute, hence you have a JWE.
Encoded JOSE
type EncodedSignature struct {
header optional {String:Any}
protected optional Bytes
signature Bytes
}
type EncodedRecipient struct {
encrypted_key optional Bytes
header optional {String:Any}
}
type EncodedJWE struct {
aad optional Bytes
ciphertext Bytes
iv optional Bytes
protected optional Bytes
recipients [EncodedRecipient]
tag optional Bytes
unprotected optional {String:Any}
}
type EncodedJWS struct {
payload optional Bytes
signatures [EncodedSignature]
}
Padding for encryption
Applications may need to pad the cleartext when encrypting to avoid leaking the size of the cleartext. This raises the question of how the application knows what part of the decrypted cleartext is padding. In this case we use the fact that the cleartext MUST be a valid CID, implementations should parse the cleartext as a CID and discard any content beyond the multihash digest size - which we assume to be the padding.
Decoded JOSE
Typically implementations will want to decode this format into something more useful for applications. Exactly what that will look like depends on the language of the implementation, here we use the IPLD schema language to give a somewhat language agnostic description of what the decoded representation might look like at runtime. Note that everything which is specified as base64url(ascii(<some JSON>))
in the JOSE specs - and which we encode as Bytes
in the wire format - is here decoded to a String
. We also add the link &Any
attribute to the DecodedJWS
if the payload is a CID, so that applications to easily retrieve the authenticated content. Otherwise, if the content of the payload
is not a CID, it MUST be JSON. While decoding the json data from the payload, all strings must be checked if they match the regex /ipfs:\/\/[a-zA-Z0-9]+$/
. If so they should be converted to a Link
type. Note that we don't support dag-json like types. Finally the decoded payload should be added to the pld
field, while the payload
retains the base64url encoded data.
Also note that, as with the encoded representation, there are two different representations; DecodedJWE
and DecodedJWS
. Applications can distinguish between these two branches in the same way as with the Encoded representation described above.
type DecodedSignature struct {
header optional {String:Any}
protected optional String
signature String
}
type DecodedJWS struct {
payload String
signatures [DecodedSignature]
link optional &Any
pld optional {String:Any}
}
type DecodedRecipient struct {
encrypted_key optional String
header optional {String:Any}
}
type DecodedJWE struct {
aad optional String
ciphertext String
iv String
protected String
recipients [DecodedRecipient]
tag String
unprotected optional {String:Any}
}