IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] ASN.1 vs. DER Encoding

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 26 March 2019 17:34 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 481A7120466 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:34:49 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com
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 nyPnMczqCH7s for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from purple.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (purple.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.150]) (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 39A8C1203A0 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5503E5322; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a60.g.dreamhost.com (unknown [100.96.28.55]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 642553E5B9E; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a60.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.17.2); Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:34:45 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Cooing-Language: 22e964bd19bd50f7_1553621685573_2829966121
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1553621685573:1354251857
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1553621685573
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a60.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a60.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 159D9800AA; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=FzDT8f13Eq+f5pQX+QcnZgJ+QqM=; b=ER7k8fAS291 4M6of2K/bCLWs5HaUp9TJfCUTs/VYgyvM3uW0sMNPdWI98GZmDGExCvospV2M94h yPUxuwttsibpIobf5Vb6cuf1bSKcRRxejCp9ReBbbn2MwvU7Gz8FaeTyXxCnEKqN N61zqBNDTOUVqKBwCBIjAevbq7hWeU2s=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a60.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3BD7800D9; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:34:40 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a60
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: "Dr. Pala" <madwolf@openca.org>, "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20190326173439.GA4211@localhost>
References: <21dec229-5b5c-8d52-6817-edac2e39ceec@openca.org> <20190326164951.GX4211@localhost> <22089F23-6A37-498F-B4EE-5C528806985F@tzi.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <22089F23-6A37-498F-B4EE-5C528806985F@tzi.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddrkedtgdelvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggugfgjfgesthekredttderjeenucfhrhhomheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqeenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppedvgedrvdekrddutdekrddukeefnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopehlohgtrghlhhhoshhtpdhinhgvthepvdegrddvkedruddtkedrudekfedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/X66sfRTbPgj0Ik10u5pNlCcpmUI>
Subject: Re: [saag] ASN.1 vs. DER Encoding
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/saag/>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:34:50 -0000

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 06:20:57PM +0100, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2019, at 17:49, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
> > 
> > CBORER
> 
> Made my day :-)
> (Probably works for the Boring Company?)
> 
> But seriously, we actually have a replacement for the ASN.1 level of the picture, as well (the picture where CBOR is a replacement for DER):  
> 
> 	CDDL.
> 
> 	https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-08
> 
> In RFC editor queue since 2019-03-25 (a.k.a. yesterday).
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cbor-cddl/referencedby/
> (RFCs/drafts referencing previous versions: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-greevenbosch-appsawg-cbor-cddl/referencedby/ — if your draft still does this, please update.)

There had better be something remarkably new and interesting in that DL,
otherwise I don't see the point of abandoning ASN.1.  At the very least
it'd better have nicer syntax and have a great deal of functionality.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email