- From: Brian LaMacchia <bal@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:35:40 +0000
- To: Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>, 'Pratik Datta' <pratik.datta@oracle.com>, "public-xmlsec@w3.org" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Not only should it be hash-agile, but it should probably support multiple parallel hash values. --bal -----Original Message----- From: public-xmlsec-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xmlsec-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Scott Cantor Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 9:49 AM To: 'Pratik Datta'; public-xmlsec@w3.org Subject: RE: X509IssuerSerial alternatives in WS Security specification > If you see, some of them build on XML Sig mechanisms e.g. > IssuerSerial, and > some of them are different e.g. the SKI and direct, and some of them > are new > e.g. Thumbprint. We need to have a Thumbprint equivalent in XML Sig. I was going to propose that we deprecate X509IssuerSerial and leave it at that, mainly because if we do a thumbprint, I think it probably needs to be hash agile. Not so much for XML Signature's use, but the other places KeyInfo gets used it isn't always a hint, but may normatively refer to a key for the purposes of trust establishment. That seems like a bigger change than we'd want to introduce for Last Call, but if people want it, I can write it up. I will propose deprecation text for X509IssuerSerial separately, as a replacement for the "take care" text we have there now. -- Scott
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 19:41:26 UTC