Re: [pkix] draft-turner-additional-methods-4kis to ISE

mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex) Thu, 21 June 2012 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.com>
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 1C29221F862F for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y7pNo7MY5FCp for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpde01.sap-ag.de (smtpde01.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D1C721F8638 for <pkix@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sap.corp by smtpde01.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id q5LLf09I028355 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:41:00 +0200 (MEST)
In-Reply-To: <4FE34D1C.1040704@ieca.com>
To: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:41:00 +0200
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL125 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20120621214100.8C8EB1A0AD@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
From: mrex@sap.com
X-SAP: out
Cc: "pkix@ietf.org" <pkix@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pkix] draft-turner-additional-methods-4kis to ISE
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 21:41:06 -0000

Sean Turner wrote:
> 
> Manger, James H wrote:
>> A few comments on "Additional methods for key identifiers":
>>
>> Truncation: are the "least significant bits" of a hash the
>> right-most bits? I would have though keeping the leftmost bits
>> was slightly more intuitive.
> 
> I'll add "(i.e., leftmost)" after "least significant bits".

"leftmost bits" is also what NIST FIPS 186-3 (Digital Signature Standard)
uses for hash output truncation (Section 4.2, page 16):

                                                   When the length of the
   output of the hash function is greater than N (i.e., the bit length of q),
   then the leftmost N bits of the hash function output block shall be used
   in any calculation using the hash function output during the generation
   or verification of a digital signature.



> 
> I'll add a new section:
>
>   [...]
>
> The SHA-256 hash output of the key is as follows:
> 
>    E72EE6C9C63D2B7F960F0E0611B9800917B5F9494182403EF1BBA8927A57625E
> 
> Using method 1 in Section 2, the output is truncated as follows:
> 
>    E72EE6C9C63D2B7F960F0E0611B9800917B5F949


Yup, an example helps showing truncation to "leftmost bits".


-Martin