Re: [Trans] Precertificate format

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Mon, 15 September 2014 19:03 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95C151A8747 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 12:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.853
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.853 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 B-28pPQ8-Xtr for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 12:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.1.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8C8D1A0047 for <trans@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dommiel.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:33099 helo=comsec.home) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1XTbON-000PO3-Ey for trans@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 14:52:51 -0400
Message-ID: <54173573.80902@bbn.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 14:52:35 -0400
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: trans@ietf.org
References: <540DFA75.2040000@gmail.com> <540E0E90.1070208@bbn.com> <540E28FD.7050809@gmail.com> <540ECD3A.4040704@primekey.se> <540F4598.5010505@bbn.com> <CABrd9SSg5=wuierLoqAU00pMHxgGx+=ai5mHv4u5t6zm43yDWg@mail.gmail.com> <5410779A.20209@bbn.com> <CABrd9STnjqDBF4-5ABJ86M_d0bwRyjRNjRW6Hnj9UpeYC7Xz9A@mail.gmail.com> <5411BDE4.1060508@bbn.com> <CABrd9STAHzg_KJi=nA7hsvz+k0SMS+bg6c3hcBtUwfOUm=hqTQ@mail.gmail.com> <5411E6B4.5040401@bbn.com> <02c365fdc2b8478fb78f310382ae0bb7@EX2.corp.digicert.com>
In-Reply-To: <02c365fdc2b8478fb78f310382ae0bb7@EX2.corp.digicert.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/ZV-PaReL4HWUCzcURSZoLCtXzVI
Subject: Re: [Trans] Precertificate format
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 19:03:01 -0000

Jeremy,
> Why not use a TBSCertificate from RFC 5280 with no modifications from the final certificate (no poison extension) and sign it with a PKCS7 signature instead of a RFC 5280 signature?  By doing this you are not creating a valid certificate so you are not technically breaking RFC 5280 (re-using serial numbers) and it couldn't be used as a certificate even if some software incorrectly ignored the poison extension.
Using either a TBS cert with a different signature format or CRMF would 
avoid the
53280 conflict. It would not, however, address the "know the serial 
number before you issue the
cert" concern that I raised. So, we have a couple of proposals that 
address at least half of
the problem, which is a start.

Steve