Re: [pkix] Clarification on OCSP with nonce

Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz> Mon, 12 March 2018 10:46 UTC

Return-Path: <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
X-Original-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81CC3126CC7 for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 03:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=auckland.ac.nz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MUFtIRIHzvlP for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 03:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz (mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.125.246]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F86F1241F5 for <pkix@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 03:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=@auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1520851611; x=1552387611; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=E8dQPDeV1ztl1gfIYf9jCUEabABXUxEa85e0AOEz1es=; b=xTpzHrlPwmY42GqqvmqsobFRXU9Fyk4mfWISltJh4ChnpS8b+lANTiZe tb10X2ohgWlFCQc4pWTrffc4qANbm/k3retGK0Tk4IbGHdJ9MVwdxnkGj VlnpauBp7no1xUJdBcJZSx3HSX3zSD8pdCOLxMQjxVGJgGkMYN0MD/gtQ ZKpEmduml1hemcdepQrz5qhZ4N+kRDz/Fr2pHGoaXkerMk3x+EuZu2LNo dZwSNgtGtI2UbjHhY9edg0cgU3+z6EhiTWOTRF6Khcr7C71O6qKE+Uy7r Rw4WGYYN46nXOLqEY18+5qynN74R+C5Amgo/nPxu+fMOREbQYJzyps+4u A==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,460,1515409200"; d="scan'208";a="3836253"
X-Ironport-HAT: MAIL-SERVERS - $RELAYED
X-Ironport-Source: 10.6.2.2 - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from smtp.uoa.auckland.ac.nz (HELO uxcn13-ogg-a.UoA.auckland.ac.nz) ([10.6.2.2]) by mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 12 Mar 2018 23:46:49 +1300
Received: from uxcn13-ogg-d.UoA.auckland.ac.nz (10.6.2.5) by uxcn13-ogg-a.UoA.auckland.ac.nz (10.6.2.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 23:46:48 +1300
Received: from uxcn13-ogg-d.UoA.auckland.ac.nz ([10.6.2.25]) by uxcn13-ogg-d.UoA.auckland.ac.nz ([10.6.2.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 23:46:48 +1300
From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
To: Koichi Sugimoto <koichi.sugimoto@globalsign.com>, "pkix@ietf.org" <pkix@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Clarification on OCSP with nonce
Thread-Index: AdO54ZappleqL/mlQlio22X3ngYxHwADcZiF
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:46:48 +0000
Message-ID: <1520851608650.16192@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
References: <SG2PR03MB1421D2648D78F83D159828999DD30@SG2PR03MB1421.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <SG2PR03MB1421D2648D78F83D159828999DD30@SG2PR03MB1421.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [130.216.158.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/Aqbw97HiWZJIlPaMMc01em1fwRU>
Subject: Re: [pkix] Clarification on OCSP with nonce
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: PKIX Working Group <pkix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pkix/>
List-Post: <mailto:pkix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:46:54 -0000

Koichi Sugimoto <koichi.sugimoto@globalsign.com> writes:

>There is a description about OCSP with nonce in RFC 6960, but there is no
>description for the behavior of OCSP responder when the client sends an OCSP
>request with nonce.

For all OCSP responders I know of that are run by public CAs (I don't know
about private/closed-community CAs, for obvious reasons), you'll get back a
response without the nonce.

>Specifically, will the OCSP responder that receives the OCSP request with
>nonce give me an opinion on whether to omit the nonce and return the response?

Well, you'll get it back without your nonce, if that's what you mean by
"opinion" :-).

Peter.