- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 23:00:08 -0400
- To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, dee3@torque.pothole.com
After some further thought, I've concluded that the Minimal Canonicalization doesn't make much sense for XML either. See separate message. Donald From: "Jim Schaad (Exchange)" <jimsch@EXCHANGE.MICROSOFT.com> Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:54:41 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-Id: <199910202054.QAA12620@www19.w3.org> Message-ID: <EAB5B8B61A04684198FF1D0C1B3ACD194A70A5@DINO> To: "'Solo, David'" <david.solo@citicorp.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:54:23 -0700 >Dave, > >I'm sorry, but the draft states that you are not going to use NULL for XML. >>From the draft "This algorithm is appropriate for applications where the >resource to be signed is not XML, or where the XML document will be exactly >preserved". > >jim > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Solo, David [mailto:david.solo@citicorp.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 5:26 AM >> To: jimsch@EXCHANGE.MICROSOFT.com; w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org >> Subject: RE: Null Canonicalization Algorithm >> >> >> At least at the moment, we still have two c14n algorithms, >> one for signedInfo >> and one for objects. I agree with your statement as it >> applies to objects; but >> I'm not sure about it for SignedInfo. In SignedInfo, the >> c14n alg is >> mandatory, so you'd need a NULL alg ID if you wanted to sign >> the data as >> transmitted. I'd suggest leaving the alg ID there until we >> resolve the >> question about fixing the SignedInfo c14n alg. >> >> Dave >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: jimsch [mailto:jimsch@EXCHANGE.MICROSOFT.com] >> > Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 6:22 PM >> > To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig >> > Cc: jimsch >> > Subject: Null Canonicalization Algorithm >> > >> > >> > Given the text in section 4.3.3 about transformations only be >> > applied if >> > they are listed, and the text in section 1.3.3 "If no >> Transformations >> > element is present, the data pointed at by Location is >> > digested directly". >> > I believe that we can remove the NULL canonicalization >> > algorithm from the >> > document. The algorithm basically states that you do no >> > changes on the >> > input before hashing it. This is the same thing as the text >> > in section >> > 1.3.3 says. >> > Note: It might be wise to copy this comment to section 4.3.3 >> > as well for >> > people to easily see it during implemenation. >> > Recommend: Remove NULL Canonicalization algorithm from the >> > document in all >> > locations. >> > jim schaad
Received on Sunday, 24 October 1999 23:00:12 UTC