[Key Vault] Add warnings to RSA_1_5 and RSA-OAEP documentation

[mccoyp]

Data Plane API Specification Update Pull Request

Tip

Overwhelmed by all this guidance? See the Getting help section at the bottom of this PR description.

This adds warnings to the descriptions of the RSA_1_5 and RSA-OAEP encryption algorithms, in alignment with other documented warnings. Key wrap examples are also updated to use RSA-OAEP-256 instead of RSA_1_5, with service return values updated accordingly.

PR review workflow diagram

Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.

API Info: The Basics

Most of the information about your service should be captured in the issue that serves as your API Spec engagement record.

• Link to API Spec engagement record issue:

Is this review for (select one):

• a private preview
• a public preview
• GA release

Change Scope

^{This section will help us focus on the specific parts of your API that are new or have been modified.
Please share a link to the design document for the new APIs, a link to the previous API Spec document (if applicable), and the root paths that have been updated.}

• Design Document:
• Previous API Spec Doc:
• Updated paths:

Viewing API changes

For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table
in the Generated ApiView comment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.

Suppressing failures

If one or multiple validation error/warning suppression(s) is detected in your PR, please follow the
Swagger-Suppression-Process
to get approval.

❔Got questions? Need additional info?? We are here to help!

Contact us!

The Azure API Review Board is dedicated to helping you create amazing APIs. You can read about our mission and learn more about our process on our wiki.

• 💬 Teams Channel
• 💌 email

Click here for links to tools, specs, guidelines & other good stuff

Tooling

• Open API validation tools were run on this PR. Go here to see how to fix errors
• Spectral Linting

Guidelines & Specifications

• Azure REST API Guidelines
• OpenAPI Style Guidelines
• Azure Breaking Change Policy

Helpful Links

• Schedule a data plane REST API spec review

Getting help

• First, please carefully read through this PR description, from top to bottom.
• If you don't have permissions to remove or add labels to the PR, request write access per aka.ms/azsdk/access#request-access-to-rest-api-or-sdk-repositories
• To understand what you must do next to merge this PR, see the Next Steps to Merge comment. It will appear within few minutes of submitting this PR and will continue to be up-to-date with current PR state.
• For guidance on fixing this PR CI check failures, see the hyperlinks provided in given failure
  and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
• If the PR CI checks appear to be stuck in queued state, please add a comment with contents /azp run.
  This should result in a new comment denoting a PR validation pipeline has started and the checks should be updated after few minutes.
• If the help provided by the previous points is not enough, post to https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel and link to this PR.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Next Steps to Merge

✅ All automated merging requirements have been met! To get your PR merged, see aka.ms/azsdk/specreview/merge.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Generated ApiView

Language	Package Name	ApiView Link
Go	sdk/security/keyvault/azkeys	There is no API change compared with the previous version
Python	azure-keyvault-keys	https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/9507cb5f29024272a1f19016634b6a25?revisionId=1205d22c5d9b4149a76eabc113af1198
TypeSpec	Security.KeyVault.Keys	https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/0529655b61bc404ebd37d2d5192ba45a?revisionId=f0f858d0d971487fa6e9bd0c7223d6a9

[azure-sdk]

API change check

APIView has identified API level changes in this PR and created following API reviews.

Microsoft.KeyVault
KeyVault

[jackrichins]

There are 2 places where RSAES is incorrectly written instead of RSA_OAEP. It's a preexisting typo we should just fix now while we're at it. Other than those 2 minor typos, it looks great and I'm ready to approve everything else.

[jackrichins]

Sorry about my previous comments. Should have read more, RSAES is the right term.