IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Logotypes in certificates

Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@entegrity.com> Wed, 21 March 2001 19:32 UTC

Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA08929 for <pkix-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:32:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost by above.proper.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA23432; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 11:31:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.imc.org (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 21 Mar 2001 11:31:18 -0800
Received: from indy.gradient.com (root@indy.gradient.com [192.92.110.1]) by above.proper.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23402 for <ietf-pkix@imc.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 11:31:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bigbird.gradient.com (bigbird.gradient.com [192.92.110.50]) by indy.gradient.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA06127; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:31:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: by bigbird.gradient.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) id <G1NWH7VY>; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:28:02 -0500
Message-ID: <899128A30EEDD1118FC900A0C9C74A34BA96AF@bigbird.gradient.com>
From: Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@entegrity.com>
To: "'pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz'" <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>, tgindin@us.ibm.com
Cc: ietf-pkix@imc.org
Subject: RE: Logotypes in certificates
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:26:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10)
Content-Type: text/plain
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

I'm confused. I thought the proposal was to allow a logotype that
corresponds to the Subject not the Issuer.

Hal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz [mailto:pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 12:56 AM
> To: tgindin@us.ibm.com
> Cc: ietf-pkix@imc.org
> Subject: RE: Logotypes in certificates
> 
> 
> "Tom Gindin" <tgindin@us.ibm.com> writes:
> 
> >Wouldn't Logotypes most easily be implemented as an 
> OTHER-NAME within one of
> >the alternate name fields (probably SubjectAltName)?  If so, 
> how would they
> >affect NameConstraints and the like?  IMHO, they would have 
> little effect on
> >them since logos are not hierarchical names and thus 
> couldn't easily be
> >governed by NameConstraints.
> 
> That sounds like a sensible way to do it, if your cert is 
> issued by (say) VISA
> then they'll put the VISA logo in the issuer's other-name.  I 
> used an other-
> name for the MPEG-of-cat cert I created a few years back and 
> both MSIE/Windows
> and Netscape accepted it (meaning they didn't reject the cert 
> or crash) so it
> looks like a fairly clean way to do it.
> 
> Peter.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email