IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pkix] a question of cert (and OCSP) extension syntax

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 30 March 2015 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F6371A903E for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:24:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 vC0mS1a5PGee for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x235.google.com (mail-wg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78B591A903D for <pkix@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgbdm7 with SMTP id dm7so76668049wgb.1 for <pkix@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8FzuP4VSzp+CZ4BqqTOucGv7Urrc7Dg1zS2amA+KmLA=; b=1HVsM3uHKT1Nj/HHCZtngVOyxSRI34LvZcXXcySq4MhgA0is6ODvFM861UINVVVFhQ DtxofaLBr2ZqY2ttN3o+p9PoLuj73oj7OGjQqYBkW++lF/ITFQe3YZvleRNasMBqanlW RXeZ6p0qtzqBGb5/Xnfx6Mup5uHvYk4lI7/8hTM4TH8/SptsDLofKKm6HGnTAyG0pI1I 1GUMXrFtapJFwWo9IsnVzRlLXhI51A6F8H4dilC9/GlEdBw2v5IHG7qynmZk0wcXiSTU 180UJJjf/4GKqpE1SYObAWTm41cTgelIc9FbQ8zG+63JRUxqD56qbO2Zby+r+KJPACLp u5ow==
X-Received: by 10.194.6.228 with SMTP id e4mr65018354wja.63.1427736242748; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.17] ([46.120.13.132]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id hd10sm17236865wib.7.2015.03.30.10.23.44 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <3161EB72-BE23-44CB-B02A-12648BAE73BB@vigilsec.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 20:23:43 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <74EB71CA-3E5F-4D93-9232-3F1AA7308D7B@gmail.com>
References: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73AAFB6418@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <C961CE34-4F55-4B11-86D7-1566B701911D@seantek.com> <5512C9C7.70202@comodo.com> <55159714.1070902@openca.org> <55190678.6080007@comodo.com> <924332F5-FED1-4A0C-BBD8-146C1AC549B3@vigilsec.com> <A194E40C-016B-4CEA-A9A8-9A179C876D43@vpnc.org> <3161EB72-BE23-44CB-B02A-12648BAE73BB@vigilsec.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/c03wTAU4i3DCkbKQcNATs9E12Iw>
Cc: IETF PKIX <pkix@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [pkix] a question of cert (and OCSP) extension syntax
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:24:06 -0000

> On Mar 30, 2015, at 6:46 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> Paul:
> 
>>>> I think it's only "wrong" and "weird" if you take the view that "if it could conceivably be constructed in ASN.1, then it MUST be constructed in ASN.1".  I don't take that view.
>>> 
>>> Certificates are ASN.1, and RFC 5280 (and its predecessors) say that extensions are OCTET STRING wrapped ASN.1 structures.  From section 4.2 of RFC 2459:
>>> 
>>> 	Each extension includes an OID and an ASN.1 structure.
>> 
>> I always interpreted the "an ASN.1 structure" there as meaning that any structure was acceptable, whether it was SEQUENCE or INTEGER or OCTET STRING or whatever.
> 
> The usage in this case is a non-ASN.1 structure shoved into an OCTET STRING and then wrapped in an OCTET STRING.

That is not without precedent.  A subject alternative name ([1]) of type rfc822Name is required to be formatted according to section 4.1.2 of RFC 2821, and that’s not ASN-1 formatted.

I realize that for a public part of a diffie-hellman exchange there is a natural ASN.1 structure (a sequence of two integers or a boolean and an integer), but we could dream up something like that for an email address as well.

Yoav

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.6

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status