Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol
Denis Pinkas <Denis.Pinkas@bull.net> Mon, 18 June 2001 13:54 UTC
Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA07886 for <pkix-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 09:54:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by above.proper.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f5ICidf20408 for ietf-pkix-bks; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 05:44:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin2.bull.net (odin2.bull.net [192.90.70.84]) by above.proper.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f5ICibJ20401 for <ietf-pkix@imc.org>; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 05:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lvt-mail.frlv.bull.fr (lvt-mail.frlv.bull.fr [129.184.62.223]) by odin2.bull.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA10172; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:45:17 +0200
Received: from bull.net (frlva3786.frlv.bull.fr [129.184.37.97]) by lvt-mail.frlv.bull.fr (8.9.2/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA18712; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:44:05 +0200
Message-ID: <3B2DF78B.25E38901@bull.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:43:55 +0200
From: Denis Pinkas <Denis.Pinkas@bull.net>
Organization: Integris. A Bull Company
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [fr] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz
CC: liaquat.khan@gta.multicert.org, ietf-pkix@imc.org
Subject: Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol
References: <99286408223457@kahu.cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-pkix/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-pkix-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Peter, I do not want to come into long discussions on that topic. I just wanted to make sure that "never valid" will be dropped. > >Liaquat, > > > >>I agree a new reason code of ("never valid") has uses. This will allow a > >>relying party when verifying a digital signatures using a certificate, which > >>when performing revocation checking is found to be on a CRL with the a new > >>reason code ("never valid"), to detect that the digital signature should not > >>be trusted even if the digital signature was produced before the time of the > >>revocation of the certificate. Otherwise in theory signature produced > >>before the revocation will continue to be considered valid - not a good > >>situation for the relying party or for the CA. > > > >This is the reverse situation. If a signature was tested to be valid e.g. in > >June 2000 and the certificate was revoked for any reason e.g. in May 2001, > >then the signature tested good in June 2000, shall continue to be valid, > >otherwise it would not be a good situation for relying parties. > But if the certificate was issued in error then it should (once discovered) be > marked as never having been valid for any purpose at any time. Are you saying > that a bogus cert should be regarded as valid until it was officially revoked? Before the "error" was discovered, relying parties have legitimately used the *valid* certificate. The CA may be liable for the error. This depends on the guarantee attached with the certificate. > Does this mean that if I get something signed with one of those bogus > Microsoft certs I should regard it as coming from MS provided it was signed > before they were revoked? The answer is not as simple as "yes" or "no". In order to be able to tell that a signature is valid, the relying party must prove that the signature was checked as valid at a time T prior to the revocation time. In the case you cite, unless the relying party can prove that he made the verification before the revocation was announced, then he cannot claim for any dammage. In other words, if I take today one signature made by that bogus certificate, I will need to prove that I have verified the validity of it at the time I used it. If I use it for the first time today, I would need to get a time-stamp over it today. In that case, that's too late: my time-stamp will be after the revocation date. Now, you are probably going to tell me that you could re-use the data captured by someone else that did the validation before the bogus certificate was revoked (some kind of replay attack). In the work I have been involved with, I have worked in the context of signed business transactions, but not signed code. In the context of signed business transactions at least one party is deeply interrested to make sure that the signature is valid and the signature applies to conditions between two parties. In the context of signed code, thousands of relying parties are interrested. It is an un-explored area. I would tend to say that we should have a replay protection against the above scenario of attack. One possible direction would be to link the signed applet that has been used with the transaction making use of it. In this way, a relying party could validly claim that his transaction has been done using the bogus applet, otherwise there is no proof. Denis > Peter.
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol JANES, Mark
- Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Hansen Wang
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Carlin Covey
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Williams
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Frank Balluffi
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Nada Kapidzic Cicovic
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Housley, Russ
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Andrew W. Gray
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Paul Hoffman / IMC
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Hansen Wang
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Marc Branchaud
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Paul Gogarty
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol jim
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Hansen Wang
- Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Mr Jonathan W Jenkyn
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Hansen Wang
- Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Paul Hoffman / IMC
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol jim
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Bob Jueneman
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Carlin Covey
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Marc Branchaud
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Marc Branchaud
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Marc Branchaud
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Lynn.Wheeler
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Marc Branchaud
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Carlin Covey
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Lynn.Wheeler
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Paul Gogarty
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Carlin Covey
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Bob Jueneman
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Terry Hayes
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Carlin Covey
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Lynn.Wheeler
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Massimiliano Pala
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol jim
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol jim
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Lynn.Wheeler
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Hal Lockhart
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol jim
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Liaquat Khan
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Scherling, Mark
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Santosh Chokhani
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Tony Bartoletti
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol jim
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Luis Azevedo
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Denis Pinkas
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Peter Gutmann
- RE: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Liaquat Khan
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Denis Pinkas
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Denis Pinkas
- Re: Online Certificate Revocation Protocol Nick Pope