Re: [office] Proper identifier for Excel-style digest algorithm

From
Duane Nickull <>
Date
2008-07-07T19:59:26+00:00
ID
Thread
Re: [office] Proper identifier for Excel-style digest algorithm
Title: Re: [office] Proper identifier for Excel-style digest algorithm

I’ll research how PDF does this too.  

D

On 07/07/08 12:50 PM, "" <> wrote:

Kohei Yoshida <> wrote on 07/07/2008 03:03:46 PM:

> Hi there,

> 

> I've already asked privately to Michael and Rob, and I think it's

> appropriate to ask this list.

> 

> I'm working on supporting the password hash algorithm that Excel uses to

> hash worksheet and document passwords in OOo.  Luckily this doesn't

> require any modification to the ODF schema since ODF already allows

> alternative digest algorithm as described in Section 18.972

> table:protected (as of v1.2 draft7-3).  But I'd like to correctly

> associate and document this Excel-style algorithm in the ODF spec.

> 

> The algorithm itself is documented in Section 3.3.1.81 of ECMA TC-45

> OOXML specification.  The code contained therein, however, is not

> entirely correct, so I posted the correct algorithm in my blog page[1]

> for now.  I assume the final version of the OOXML spec will contain the

> correct algorithm, but so far, the latest (public) version of the spec

> that I have access to still contains the old, incorrect version.

> 

> The question I'd like to ask the list members is this: what identifier

> should we use as the value of the table:protection-key-digest-algorithm

> attribute to refer to the new algorithm?  The current definition for

> this attribute:

> 

> <attribute name="table:protection-key-digest-algorithm" 

>            a:defaultValue="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1 <http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1> ">

>     <ref name="anyURI"/>

> </attribute>

> 

> suggests that the name must be a URI.  But I'm not sure what URI to use

> for this new algorithm.

> 

> Any ideas, anyone?

> 

How does OOXML, in their revised text, refer to the legacy algorithm?  I thought they also supported modern algorithms now like SHA256.  So they must have some way of indicating or referring to the legacy algorithm.  It might not be a URI, but they must describe it somehow, right?  If all else fails, call it something like "ISO/IEC 29500 Legacy Hash". 

Ideally we would refer to either ISO/IEC 29500, section 3.3.1.81 or  Ecma-376 (second edition) whenever either one of those documents appears in a publicly viewable form.  I don't think we want to duplicate their algorithm definition if we can avoid doing so.  Better to reference what they already have, when it is corrected. 

-Rob

-- 

**********************************************************************

Senior Technical Evangelist - Adobe Systems, Inc.

Duane's World TV Show - http://www.duanesworldtv.org/

Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com

Community Music - http://www.mix2r.com

My Band - http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury

Adobe MAX 2008 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/08/adobe-max-2008.html

**********************************************************************