Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
JSON Web Token (JWT, suggested pronunciation / dʒ ɒ t /, same as the word "jot" [1]) is a proposed Internet standard for creating data with optional signature and/or optional encryption whose payload holds JSON that asserts some number of claims.
CBOR encoded data is seen as a stream of data items. Each data item consists of a header byte containing a 3-bit type and 5-bit short count. This is followed by an optional extended count (if the short count is in the range 24–27), and an optional payload. For types 0, 1, and 7, there is no payload; the count is the value. For types 2 (byte ...
Field name Index (Bytes) Purpose Start-of-frame: 0: Denotes the start of frame transmission (v1.0: 0xFE) Payload-length: 1: length of payload (n) Packet sequence: 2: Each component counts up their send sequence. Allows for detection of packet loss. System ID: 3: Identification of the SENDING system. Allows to differentiate different systems on ...
JWS can be used for applications in which digitally signed information must be sent in a machine-readable format, such as e-commerce.For example, say a user named Bob is browsing widget prices on a web site (widgets.com), and wishes to get a quote on one of them.
Ed25519 is the EdDSA signature scheme using SHA-512 (SHA-2) and an elliptic curve related to Curve25519 [2] where =, / is the twisted Edwards curve + =, = + and = is the unique point in () whose coordinate is / and whose coordinate is positive.
The smallest CoAP message is 4 bytes in length, if the token, options and payload fields are omitted, i.e. if it only consists of the CoAP header. The header is followed by the token value (0 to 8 bytes) which may be followed by a list of options in an optimized type–length–value format.
In cryptography, Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) [1] is a mode of operation for symmetric-key cryptographic block ciphers which is widely adopted for its performance. GCM throughput rates for state-of-the-art, high-speed communication channels can be achieved with inexpensive hardware resources.
Although the two standards address the same use case, SAML 2.0 is incompatible with its predecessor. Although ID-FF 1.2 was contributed to OASIS as the basis of SAML 2.0, there are some important differences between SAML 2.0 and ID-FF 1.2. In particular, the two specifications, despite their common roots, are incompatible. [9]