- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:48:23 +0100
- 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 UTC