ietf-smime
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Last Call Comments on esscertid

2006-12-07 15:27:36

Russ,

I was trying to say that the hash of the cert should match the hash in the
attribute.  I will re-word appropriately.

Jim
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ Housley [mailto:housley(_at_)vigilsec(_dot_)com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 6:26 AM
To: jimsch(_at_)exmsft(_dot_)com
Cc: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last Call Comments on esscertid

Jim:

As part of the last call comments I propose to add the 
following text to
Section 2.   Wordsmithing welcome.


Jim Schaad


Four cases exist which need to be taken into account when using this 
attribute for correct processing:

1.  Signature Validates and the hashes match:  This is the 
success case.

2.  Signature Validates and the hashes do not match:  In 
this case the 
certificate contained the correct public key, the certificate 
containing the public key is not the one that the signer 
intended to be 
used.  In this case the application should attempt a search for a 
different certificate with the same public key and for which 
the hashes 
match.  If no such certificate can be found, this is a failure case.

3.  Signature Fails Validation and the hashes match:  In 
this case it 
can be assumed that the signature has been modified in some 
fashion.  
This is a failure case.

4.  Signature Fails Validation and the Hashes do not match:  In this 
case it can be either that the signature has been modified, 
or that the 
wrong certificate has been used.  Applications should 
attempt a search 
for a different certificate which matches the hash value and the new 
certificate used to retry the signature validation.

In Case 4, the application should look for a different 
certificate that contains a different public key.  Thus, the 
hash value should be different, not match.

Russ




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