-----Original Message-----
From: Dr Stephen Henson [mailto:shenson(_at_)bigfoot(_dot_)com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 6:48 PM
To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Comment on Message spec.
Re 2.6.1:
- If the receiving agent has not yet created a list of capabilities
for the sender's public key, then, after verifying the signature
on the incoming message and checking the timestamp, the receiving
agent SHOULD create a new list containing at least the signing
time and the symmetric capabilities.
- If such a list already exists, the receiving agent SHOULD verify
that the signing time in the incoming message is greater than
the signing time stored in the list and that the signature is
valid. If so, the receiving agent SHOULD update both the signing
time and capabilities in the list. Values of the signing
time that
lie far in the future (that is, a greater discrepancy than any
reasonable clock skew), or a capabilities list in messages whose
signature could not be verified, MUST NOT be accepted.
Does the MUST NOT comment apply to both cases or just the last? It
appears to just refer to the latter in which case the action
to be taken
when no list of capabilities exists and bad timestamp or signature is
not covered.
I'm not sure that this case needs to be covered -- in the event that you
receive a message that has a bad timestamp or a bad signature and that
contains capabilities, you MUST NOT use those capabilities. This is
irrespective of whether or not you currently have any capabilities for
the sender.
Did I understand your question correctly?
Secondly the "signature". Does this (if signed attributes are present)
refer to the whole message signature? That is, messageDigest matches
digest of message and signature on signed attributes valid. The
condition could be weakened to just signature of signed
attributes valid
(messageDigest could differ due to message corruption). This would not
involve loss of security since the attribute signature is still valid.
Ah -- interesting. It is my opinion that if the signature is valid on
the authenticated attributes, regardless of whether or not the
messageDigest matches the digest of the actual contents, then the
capabilities should be considered valid (in other words, I agree with
you). Other comments? Worth clarifying?
Blake
--
Blake C. Ramsdell
Worldtalk Corporation
For current info, check http://www.deming.com/users/blaker
Voice +1 425 882 8861 x103 Fax +1 425 882 8060