[Acme] Re: Update: draft-geng-acme-public-key-05

[Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]>]

Thank you for the additional explanations!

I do like the idea that once the CSR in ACME is replaced by a dedicated PoP
challenge, then we can talk about being able to enrol KEM certificates over
ACME. The kinds of things that need KEM certificates are like S/MIME email
certificates, or IoT device certificates that need transport
confidentiality, but are not online enough to be able to use TLS so they
instead use an async encryption protocol like CMS / JWE / CWE. In my
experience, the things that need KEM certificates do not usually have DNS
names but they may have other types of identifiers like email addresses or
serial numbers. I see this as more evidence to leave pk-01 and dns-01 /
http-01 complete decoupled.


On Fri, 24 Apr 2026 at 12:17, Ilari Liusvaara <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 04:25:43PM +0800, 皮皮猪 wrote:
> > I second this opinion. :-)
> >
> >
> > and just one more question:
> > for KEM keys, why not directly reuse rfc8555 processes, the server
> > encrypt the challenges token by pk, and the client decrypt first then
> > compute the keyAuthorization.
>
> - This would not authenticate the request.
> - This would require client to do symmetric decryption.
> - This would require client to know the key ID (however, client
>   likely requires it for other authorizations anyway).
>
>
>
>
> -Ilari
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>