- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 15:18:22 -0400
- To: David.Solo@citicorp.com, "Donald Eastlake" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com>
- Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Ok, I took your text, added Don's suggestion, and tweaked it to read as stated below. My only concern with the text stated below is that I would ALWAYS like this element to be present even if we REQUIRE Canonical XML. (Just like SignatureMethod). My preference has been to include syntax where (potentially) varied semantics are being communicated. For instance, making a semantic always base64 merits removing elements and attributes. But otherwise for algorithms that we require, we haven't been setting the default to that required algorithm. I think this is good because it's explicit, less-confusing, and mitigates some fuzzy concerns I have about the need to migrate to other algorithms in the future. Do you mind making this a required element? __ 4.3.1 The CanonicalizationMethod Element CanonicalizationMethod is an optional element that specifies the canonicalization algorithm applied to the SignedInfo element prior to performing signature calculations. This element uses the general structure for algorithms described in section 6.1: Algorithm Identifiers. The default canonicalization algorithm (applied if this element is omitted) is Canonical XML [XML-C14N]. Alternatives, such as the minimal canonicalization algorithm (the CRLF and charset normalization specified in section 6.5.1: Minimal Canonicalization), may be explicitly specified but are NOT REQUIRED. Consequently, their use may not interoperate with other applications that do no support the specified algorithm (see section 7: XML Canonicalization and Syntax Constraint Considerations). Security issues may also arise in the treatment of entity processing and comments if minimal or other non-XML aware canonicalization algorithms are not properly constrained (see section 8.2: Only What is "Seen" Should be Signed). We RECOMMEND that resource constrained applications that do not implement the Canonical XML [XML-C14N] transform and instead choose minimal canonicalization (or some other form) are implemented to generate Canonical XML as their output serialization to easily mitigate some of these interoperability and security concerns. For instance, such an implementation SHOULD (at least) generate standalone XML instances [XML]. _________________________________________________________ Joseph Reagle Jr. W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2000 15:18:32 UTC