[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Comments on draft-ietf-smime-x400wrap-03.txt/draft-ietf-smime -x40 0transport-03.txt

2001-08-17 02:24:57


Before this approach was adopted, we asked several 
implementors if their toolkits would handle this sort of nesting.  

Not a single implementor expressed concern at that time.  

Do you have new information for us?

No - my point was generic rather than specific - and seeking to
understand the background to the change. It appears to be to
save redundant encoding/bytes. 

I have not reviewed all the toolkits so can't comment on their
support. (FYI: the toolkit we are using is the SFL which does 
allow us to pass in signed-data and enveloped-data, and does
not require a Content-Info wrapper.)

As a user of the toolkit, rather than I provider, I need to be
able to handle the nesting, rather than expecting the toolkit
to do it for me.

For example, after validating the outer signature and retrieving the
ESS label, I want to check that the user is cleared for that label 
before going on to decrypt the next level.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>