W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: Suggested additions to 3.0 Processing Rules section

From: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:13:59 +0200
To: Donald Eastlake <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-id: <2795394228.994932839@crypto>
Dear Donald,

--On Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2001 11:28 -0400 Donald Eastlake 
<lde008@dma.isg.mot.com> wrote:

> Regardless of how things come out with what we recommend
> for base64, I suggest the addition of some material in
> 3.2 Core Validation as show in the attachment.

To 3.2.2 the last point of the notes was:

<cite>
Different implementations may produce different [...]. That is because they 
may encode the relevant DigestValue in the Reference to the data with 
different white space or the like.
</cite>

I think the produce different SignatureValues because the signature 
algorithm uses some random value  (time varian parameter) during signature 
generation which is used to protect against some attacks. This is the 
reason why you can supply some SecureRandom (in JAVA) to a Signature 
generation. ...

I would add "That is because ... white space or because of algorithm 
behaviour."


Christian


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institute for Data Communications Systems             University of Siegen
Hoelderlinstrasse 3                 D-57068 Siegen                 Germany

mail:  mailto:geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de
web:  <http://www.nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de/~geuer-pollmann/>
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 04:10:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:36 UTC