Re: [Suit] [suit]: draft-moran-suit-manifest-02

[David Brown <[e-mail]>]

Sorry, most of this can be ignored, as I missed the processReference
field in the Manifest.  I would still suggest putting the
textReference in the Manifest as well so that it doesn't require as
deep of nesting to verify the text.

David

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:47:26AM -0600, David Brown wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 01:50:38PM +0000, Rønningstad, Øyvind wrote:
>
>>AuthenticatedManifest = [
>>  authenticatedManifest: COSE_Mac / COSE_Sign,
>>  updateProcess:         bstr .cbor UpdateProcess,
>>  text:                  bstr .cbor TextMap,
>>]
>
>>UpdateProcess = [
>>  nonce :              bstr,
>>  textReference :      bstr,
>>  preConditions :      [ * PreCondition ],
>>  directives :         [ * Directive ],
>>  resources :          [ * ResourceInfo ],
>>  processors :         [ * ProcessingStep ],
>>  targets :            [ * TargetInfo ],
>>  extensions :         { * int => bstr}
>>]
>
>The textReference has to be in the Manifest that is covered by the
>signature.  As stated here, none of the updateProcess or text
>information is covered by a signature.
>
>This could be done by moving textReference above into the Manifest, as
>well as adding an updateProcessReference that would contain a digest
>of the updateProcess.  This adds complexity to verifying this
>additional information, but would indeed then allow them to be
>severed, while still being covered by the signature.
>
>David