W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > February 2009

Proposed changes for properties document

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:48:23 +0100
Message-Id: <746D0E03-D8E5-4ABE-8302-00F20246F140@w3.org>
To: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: XMLSec WG Public List <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
I'd suggest that we change the properties document as follows  
(probably some more fine tuning makes sense):

- 5. Rename "Design" -> "Signature Properties"

- Add the following text:

> This section defines a number of signature properties that are  
> expected to be commonly used in profiles.  For each property, an  
> intended processing model is suggested.  However, the details of  
> processing each of these properties will depend upon individual  
> application scenarios, and MUST be specified in any profile that  
> makes use of the properties defined in this document.

- 5.1.2 Validation (for profile property)

Replace with:

> Applications are expected to use this property to verify an  
> assertion that a signature is meant to fulfill a specific profile.   
> Validtion behavior is application-specific.

> Profiles MUST specify what application behavior is expected in case  
> an unknown profile URI is encountered.


- 5.2.2 Validation (for usage property)

Replace with:

> Applications are expected to use this property to identify a  
> specific usage for a document (e.g., document signing vs code  
> signing).  An unexpected usage URI will frequently be reason for  
> applications to deem a signature invalid for the intended usage.

> Profiles MUST specify what application behavior is expected in case  
> an unknown usage URI is encountered.

- 5.3 (Expires property)

Insert the following after the schema:

> Expiration times MUST be given as timezoned values. (See section  
> 3.2.7 of [XML Schema part 2].)

http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dateTime

- 5.3.2 Validation (for expires property)

Replace with:

> Applications are expected to use this property to identify the  
> expiry date of a signature.  Evaluation of this property is with  
> respect to an application defined reference time (possibly wall  
> clock time, possibly a time that is determined otherwise).  A  
> property value that is later than the reference time will frequently  
> be reason for applications to deem a signature invalid with respect  
> to the reference time.

> Profiles MUST specify what reference time should be used when  
> interpreting this property.

- 5.4 ReplayProtect property

Add after the XML schema snippet:

> Timestamp values MUST be timezoned. A ReplayProtect property with an  
> untimezoned time stamp MUST be treated as invalid.


- 5.4.2 Validation (for ReplayProtect property)

*Add* the following:

> Behavior of applications when an invalid property is encountered is  
> application-specific.

I wonder whether we want to say anything about the amount of time for  
which nonces are kept.  I also wonder whether it makes sense to drop  
the nonce encoding (the value is an opaque string, after all), and  
simply make it a base64 encoded octet-stream, with a (specified)  
minimum supported length.  I'd suggest something outrageous like 512  
bits for that.

--
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2009 22:48:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:57 GMT