W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 1999

Revised syntax proposal

From: David Solo <dsolo@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 21:09:24 -0400
To: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Cc: <dsolo@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <002601bee396$2749cc60$3b0d4f0c@default>
Attached is the revised syntax proposal from Richard, Barb, and I (although
given some late changes, they may choose to disavow certain aspects, and any
egregious glitches are purely mine).  There have been some major changes
since the last post (summarized in the document), mainly to address the
usage discussions that have been taking place.  The plan at this point in
conjunction with discussion here is to produce a more complete ID in time
for Irvine in accordance with Joe's outline.

Dave

-----

10 August 1999

Updated Syntax Proposal

This is the updated draft syntax proposal for the XML digital
signature effort.  There are several changes from the last posting as
well as a number of remaining open questions.

1) Major changes:

a) The signature element is now the top level element and it may be
used for detached signatures (with the signed object external) or
encapsulating signatures (containing the signed object).

b) A Manifest is one type of object which may be either internal or
external, but isn't a core part of the syntax.

c) Rearranged algorithm identifiers.  Also each algorithm is an
element in which the ID is a type attribute and the contents, if any,
are additional data.

d) There is only a single signature.  An application may create
multiple signature elements pointing to the same object or to other
signatures.

2) Open Issues:

a) Signed attributes are currently visible at the top level of
signedInfo but could be moved into object.

b) Need to look at how things (signature, manifest, algorithms,
resources) are named and referenced.

c) Do we need two processing models for external references: one in
which validation stops with the resource record (signature checked
over the digest) and one in which the digest is recalculated over the
external object.  Currently this is the distinction between the reference
option and the object option.  For example with a reference, the digest over
the item pointed to is recalculated while if a manifest
were included as an object, only the manifest itself is validated.
Note, the actual signature calculation process is the same in both
cases, the issue is whether the hash is recalculated. Also, do we we
want to restore the notion of a signature calculation in which the two
objects are concatenated?

d) Need to deal with namespace issues.

e) Need to review the algorithm and keyInfo elements to make sure they
handle defined cases.

f) Need to specify mandatory to implement algorithms and keyInfo
types.

g) Need to consider specifying other packages and/or useful types.

h) Support for one-pass processing.

3) Signature DTD:

<?xml version="1.0"?>

 <!ELEMENT signature (signedInfo, keyInfo?, sigValue)>
 <!ATTLIST signature
         id     ID      #IMPLIED>

 <!ELEMENT signedInfo (algorithms, (object|reference), signedAttributes?)>

 <!ELEMENT keyInfo ANY>
 <!ATTLIST keyInfo
         type CDATA #REQUIRED >

 <!ELEMENT sigValue (#PCDATA)>
 <!-- base64 encoded signature value -->

 <!ELEMENT algorithms (c14nAlg, sigAlg)>

 <!ELEMENT c14nAlg ANY>
 <!ATTLIST c14nAlg
         type CDATA #REQUIRED >

 <!ELEMENT sigAlg ANY>
 <!ATTLIST sigAlg
         type CDATA #REQUIRED >

 <!ELEMENT digestAlg ANY>
 <!ATTLIST digestAlg
         type CDATA #REQUIRED >

 <!ELEMENT signedAttributes (attributeData+)>
 <!-- must be at least one attributeData or omit the element-->

 <!ELEMENT attributeData ANY>
 <!ATTLIST attributeData
         type CDATA #REQUIRED >

 <!ELEMENT reference (resource)>

 <!ELEMENT object (c14nAlg, content)>

 <!ELEMENT content ANY>
 <!ATTLIST content
	 type CDATA #IMPLIED>

 <!ELEMENT resource (location, c14nAlg, digestAlg, digest)>
 <!ATTLIST resource
	 type CDATA #IMPLIED>

 <!ELEMENT location (#PCDATA)>

 <!ELEMENT digest (#PCDATA)>
 <!-- base64 encoded digest value -->

 <!ELEMENT manifest (resource+)>
 <!-- the manifest may be used as an object, or referred to by a
      reference; but is not part of the core signature syntax -->
  <!ATTLIST manifest
         id     ID      #IMPLIED>

4. Example

<signature id="foo">
   <signedInfo>
      <algorithms>
         <c14nAlg type="identity"/>
         <sigAlg type="rsaWithSHA-1"/>
      </algorithms>
      <object>
         <c14nAlg type="identity"/>
         <content type="manifest">
            <manifest id="bar">
               <resource>
                  <location> syntax.txt </location>
                  <c14nAlg type="identity"/>
                  <digestAlg type="sha-1"/>
                  <digest> a23bcd43 </digest>
               </resource>
            </manifest>
         </content>
      </object>
      <signedAttributes>
         <attributeData type="signingTime">Its midnight here</attributeData>
      </signedAttributes>
   </signedInfo>
   <keyInfo type="keyName"> 3 </keyInfo>
   <sigValue> dd2323dd </sigValue>
</signature>

5) Processing:
Validation of an XML signature consists of the following steps
a) canonicalization of the signed object based on c14n algorithm ID in
the object element.
b) c14n of the signedInfo element based on the c14n algorithm ID in
the algorithms element.
c) obtain the validation keying info from keyInfo or externally.
d) validate the sigValue based on the sigAlg ID in the algorithms
element and the key obtained in step c.
  - Digest calculation is performed over the canonicalized signedInfo
    element including start and end tags.
  - All signedAttributes are treated as opaque with respect to
    processing.
  - If a reference element is present, recalculate digest on item
    referenced and compare to digest value in resource element.
Received on Tuesday, 10 August 1999 21:04:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:07 GMT