[smime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2634 (6563)

[RFC Errata System <[e-mail]>]

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2634,
"Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6563

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: David von Oheimb <[e-mail]>

Section: 3

Original Text
-------------

   certs
      contains the list of certificates that are to be used in
      validating the message.  The first certificate identified in the
      sequence of certificate identifiers MUST be the certificate used
      to verify the signature.  The encoding of the ESSCertIDv2 for this
      certificate SHOULD include the issuerSerial field.  If other
      constraints ensure that issuerAndSerialNumber will be present in
      the SignerInfo, the issuerSerial field MAY be omitted.  The
      certificate identified is used during the signature verification
      process.  If the hash of the certificate does not match the
      certificate used to verify the signature, the signature MUST be
      considered invalid.

      If more than one certificate is present, subsequent certificates
      limit the set of certificates that are used during validation.

Corrected Text
--------------

   certs
      contains the list of certificates that are to be used in
      validating the message. It MUST contain at least one element.
      The first certificate identified in the
      sequence of certificate identifiers MUST be the certificate used
      to verify the signature.  The encoding of the ESSCertIDv2 for this
      certificate SHOULD include the issuerSerial field.  If other
      constraints ensure that issuerAndSerialNumber will be present in
      the SignerInfo, the issuerSerial field MAY be omitted.  The
      certificate identified is used during the signature verification
      process.  If the hash of the certificate does not match the
      certificate used to verify the signature, the signature MUST be
      considered invalid.

      If more than one certificate identifier is present in the sequence of ESSCertIDv2s,
      all certificates referenced there MUST be part of the signature validation chain.

Notes
-----
Some aspects of the 'certs' field of a SigningCertificateV2 attribute:

   SigningCertificateV2 ::=  SEQUENCE {
       certs        SEQUENCE OF ESSCertIDv2,
       policies     SEQUENCE OF PolicyInformation OPTIONAL
   }

described in the sentences quoted above are rather vague.
This lead to major confusion and wrong implementations.
As meanwhile has been clarified, they should be re-phrased;
see suggested new version above.

(One may further mandate/clarify that the certificate identifiers must be given in the same order
as they are expected in the validation chain, but I think this is not important because
the order should not play a critical role and will be determined by the validation chain anyway.)

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC2634 (draft-ietf-smime-ess-12)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME
Publication Date    : June 1999
Author(s)           : P. Hoffman, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : S/MIME Mail Security
Area                : Security
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG