[lamps] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9483 (7833)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Fri, 01 March 2024 10:51 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1B4C18DB8D for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 02:51:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.658
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.658 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fkvAoua2j_Kc for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 02:51:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfcpa.amsl.com [50.223.129.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49604C18DB85 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 02:51:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 1F6311FEDA74; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 02:51:35 -0800 (PST)
To: hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.com, david.von.oheimb@siemens.com, steffen.fries@siemens.com, rdd@cert.org, paul.wouters@aiven.io, housley@vigilsec.com, tim.hollebeek@digicert.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: David.von.Oheimb@siemens.com, spasm@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20240301105135.1F6311FEDA74@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 02:51:35 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/6Yu3vlTz5LCe7bh5yK0ejVUbl4Q>
Subject: [lamps] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9483 (7833)
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: This is the mail list for the LAMPS Working Group <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:51:39 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9483, "Lightweight Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Profile". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7833 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: David von Oheimb <David.von.Oheimb@siemens.com> Section: 4.1.6 Original Text ------------- -- MUST be 0 for recipientInfo type PasswordRecipientInfo Corrected Text -------------- -- MUST be 3 for recipientInfo type PasswordRecipientInfo Notes ----- It turns out that we make a mistake interpreting CMS RFC 5652 section 6.1 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5652#section-6.1). AFAICS, this was due to a misleadingly formatted condition in that section: IF ((originatorInfo is present) AND ___(any version 2 attribute certificates are present)) OR ___(any RecipientInfo structures include pwri) OR ___(any RecipientInfo structures include ori) THEN version is 3 where for clarity the indentation of the 2nd line should be one more character to the right: IF ((originatorInfo is present) AND ____(any version 2 attribute certificates are present)) OR ___(any RecipientInfo structures include pwri) OR ___(any RecipientInfo structures include ori) THEN version is 3 (I replaced leading space chars by '_' to make sure the indentation comes across.) So this can also be seen as an editorial erratum of RFC 5652. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC9483 (draft-ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile-21) -------------------------------------- Title : Lightweight Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Profile Publication Date : November 2023 Author(s) : H. Brockhaus, D. von Oheimb, S. Fries Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME Area : Security Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [lamps] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9483 (7833) RFC Errata System