IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 30 March 2015 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 D9CA21A009C for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
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 zo5rh9qncDZr for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (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 325741A00BD for <pkix@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.101] (50-1-51-95.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.95]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t2UFeg2D015187 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:40:43 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 50-1-51-95.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.95] claimed to be [10.20.30.101]
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2AC435EF-F69A-49BF-8B71-CD220B6CF2C6"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <924332F5-FED1-4A0C-BBD8-146C1AC549B3@vigilsec.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:40:39 -0700
Message-Id: <A194E40C-016B-4CEA-A9A8-9A179C876D43@vpnc.org>
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>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/iGSyG8vFP25asKdInjsCiNI_JDQ>
Cc: IETF PKIX <pkix@ietf.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 15:40:57 -0000

On Mar 30, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> Rob:
> 
>> 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.

--Paul Hoffman

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