Hello and thanks for the good work on this library.
While I was using it I came across one inconsistency with respect to handling x5c certificates on various asymmetric keys. It looks that in principle
|
JWK.__init__(self, kty, alg, use, kid, x5c, x5t, x5u, **kwargs) |
will store the x5c on the key instance but only for RSAKeys this is also included in serialize().
|
if self.x5c: |
|
res["x5c"] = [as_unicode(x) for x in self.x5c] |
Is this intentional? In principal I see no problem, that also other asymmetric keys could have a x5c certificate attached to it, in particular the ECKey.
Would you consider this a reasonable change?
Reactions are currently unavailable
Hello and thanks for the good work on this library.
While I was using it I came across one inconsistency with respect to handling x5c certificates on various asymmetric keys. It looks that in principle
JWTConnect-Python-CryptoJWT/src/cryptojwt/jwk/asym.py
Line 24 in 69b064b
JWTConnect-Python-CryptoJWT/src/cryptojwt/jwk/rsa.py
Lines 384 to 385 in 69b064b
Is this intentional? In principal I see no problem, that also other asymmetric keys could have a x5c certificate attached to it, in particular the ECKey.
Would you consider this a reasonable change?