Friday, 29 June 2001
Thursday, 28 June 2001
Wednesday, 27 June 2001
- Re: Comments on 22 June Version...
- RE: Comments on 22 June Version...
- Re: Comments on 22 June Version...
- RE: Comments on 22 June Version...
Tuesday, 26 June 2001
- RE: Comments on 22 June Version...
- Re: Comments on 22 June Version...
- Re: Comments on 22 June Version...
- RE: Comments on 22 June Version...
Monday, 25 June 2001
Saturday, 23 June 2001
Friday, 22 June 2001
Thursday, 21 June 2001
- RE: Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- RE: Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- Re: Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- RE: Consensus re exclusive canonicalization
Wednesday, 20 June 2001
- RE: Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- Consensus re exclusive canonicalization
- Re: Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Exclusive Canonicalization: A trivial problem
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- XML Reference implementation
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
Tuesday, 19 June 2001
- LF in the middle of a name in X509IssuerName and X509SubjectName
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: RSA Interoperability Results
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
Monday, 18 June 2001
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RSA Interoperability Results
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- RE: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
Friday, 15 June 2001
- Re: A Full Proposal for Adding Interoperatble Signatures for Protocol-like Applications to XMLDSIG
- Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization
Thursday, 14 June 2001
Wednesday, 13 June 2001
- Re: Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- RE: Signature Portability, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- A Full Proposal for Adding Interoperatble Signatures for Protocol-like Applications to XMLDSIG
- Re: Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- Re: dsig
- dsig
- RE: Signature Portability, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- Re: Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
- Canonical Standards and XMLDsig
- RE: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- Re: Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- Re: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- Re: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- RE: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- Re: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- RE: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- Re: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- RE: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
Tuesday, 12 June 2001
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- RE: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- Re: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- Re: Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- Re: DSAKeyValue text
- Re: XML Schema base64Binary simple type
- Signature Portabilit, CanonicalizationMethod, etc.
- <X509Data> grouping restrictions
Monday, 11 June 2001
Saturday, 9 June 2001
- RE: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- XML Schema base64Binary simple type
Friday, 8 June 2001
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
- Re: DSAKeyValue text - inferring trust from just a PK
- RE: DSAKeyValue text - inferring trust from just a PK
- Re: DSAKeyValue text - inferring trust from just a PK
Thursday, 7 June 2001
- Re: DSAKeyValue text
- Re: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
- Re: DSAKeyValue text
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
- RE: DSAKeyValue text
Wednesday, 6 June 2001
Thursday, 7 June 2001
Wednesday, 6 June 2001
- Re: Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- DSAKeyValue text
- Proposal: Text for signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
Tuesday, 5 June 2001
- RE: 3.2.1 Reference Validation - Section has been confused with S ignature Validation
- Re: signer authentication
- RE: signer authentication
- signer authentication
Monday, 4 June 2001
- RE: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?
- Re: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?
- RE: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?
- Re: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?
- RE: Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?
- Empty SignedInfo elements properly canonicalized in examples?
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- HMACOutputLength interop?
Friday, 1 June 2001
- Re: 3.2.1 Reference Validation - Section has been confused with Signa ture Validation
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- ANN: The W3C XML Processing Model Workshop
- Re: dropping MgmtData?
- More than one signer - again
- RE: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
Thursday, 31 May 2001
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: Comments/Questions about the XML-Signature spec
- RE: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- RE: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- RE: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: Looking for an article about XML Signature
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
Wednesday, 30 May 2001
- RE: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 cha racters?
- RE: Re: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
- RE: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- Re: dropping MgmtData?
- signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces, etc.
- Re: dropping MgmtData?
- Fwd: Re: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
- Re: KeyName white space
Thursday, 24 May 2001
Sunday, 27 May 2001
Wednesday, 30 May 2001
Tuesday, 29 May 2001
Monday, 28 May 2001
Thursday, 24 May 2001
- Re: Comments/Questions about the XML-Signature spec
- Re: Comments/Questions about the XML-Signature spec
- Re: AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- AW: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
Wednesday, 23 May 2001
- Re: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- Re: Comments/Questions about the XML-Signature spec
- Re: Comments/Questions about the XML-Signature spec
- Re: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 charact ers?
- Re: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- RE: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 charact ers?
- RE: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 charact ers?
- RE: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- Re: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- RE: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- Re: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- Re: Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
- Base64 -- do we really want/need line breaks every 76 characters?
Tuesday, 22 May 2001
Monday, 21 May 2001
Sunday, 20 May 2001
- Fwd: Call for Participation: XML Key Management Services Workshop, 19 July 2001
- style sheet for CR-xmldsig-core-20010419
- Comments for CR-xmldsig-core-20010419
Friday, 18 May 2001
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- [Review] Conformance in XML signature
Thursday, 17 May 2001
- RE: XML Signatures and binary files
- RE: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- Re: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: DTD-less id('object-3') -- what am I missing?
- Re: XML Signatures and binary files
- AW: DTD-less id('object-3') -- what am I missing?
- AW: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- DTD-less id('object-3') -- what am I missing?
Wednesday, 16 May 2001
- RE: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- RE: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- XML Signatures and binary files
- RE: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- RE: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- RE: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
- Re: DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- Re: KeyName white space
- DName encoding (was:KeyName white space)
- signature portability / C14N / inherited namespaces
Tuesday, 15 May 2001
- RE: KeyName white space
- RE: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: X509CRL discord
- Re: AW: X509CRL discord
- Re: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- AW: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: X509CRL discord
- AW: AW: KeyInfo interoperability
- Re: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: AW: KeyName white space
- AW: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: KeyInfo interoperability
- Re: AW: KeyName white space
- Re: AW: KeyName white space
- AW: KeyName white space
- AW: KeyInfo interoperability
- AW: X509CRL discord
- RE: KeyName white space
Monday, 14 May 2001
- Re: KeyName white space
- Re: KeyName white space
- KeyName white space
- Re: X509CRL discord
- Re: Why is it extrictly obligatory the use of CanonicalizationMethod?
Friday, 11 May 2001
Thursday, 10 May 2001
- X509CRL discord
- Re: KeyInfo interoperability
- RE: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
- Re: Comments/Questions about the XML-Signature spec
- Re: KeyInfo interoperability
- RE: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
Wednesday, 9 May 2001
Thursday, 10 May 2001
Wednesday, 9 May 2001
Thursday, 10 May 2001
Wednesday, 9 May 2001
- RE: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
- RE: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
- Re: KeyInfo interoperability
- RE: [Fwd: Erratum in section 2.1 of Canonical XML]
- RE: Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
- [Fwd: Erratum in section 2.1 of Canonical XML]
- Erratum in section 1.1 of Canonical XML
Tuesday, 8 May 2001
Friday, 4 May 2001
Monday, 30 April 2001
Friday, 27 April 2001
- XML Signature Interoperability.
- Last Call: XML-Signature Syntax and Processing to Draft Standard
- SUBSCRIBTION
Thursday, 26 April 2001
- Need Website Traffic? We Generate It!
- updated additional URIs draft
- Subscribtion
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-xmldsig-core-2-00.txt
Wednesday, 25 April 2001
- I-D ACTION:draft-eastlake-xmldsig-uri-00.txt
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: Problem: referring to a complete sub-tree using XPath
Monday, 23 April 2001
Friday, 20 April 2001
- RE: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
Thursday, 19 April 2001
- Fwd: Revised XML-Signature Syntax and Processing Candidate Recommendation: Call for Implementation Ends 19 May 2001
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Problem: referring to a complete sub-tree using XPath
Wednesday, 18 April 2001
Tuesday, 17 April 2001
- RE: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- Re: ds:CryptoBinary vs. base64Binary
- Minimal Canonicalization Removed
- Two slight tweaks to schema
- RE: additional XMLDSIG URIs
- AW: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: MS crypto API and Java security API (KeyValue)
- additional XMLDSIG URIs
Monday, 16 April 2001
Sunday, 15 April 2001
Saturday, 14 April 2001
Friday, 13 April 2001
Thursday, 12 April 2001
- Re: KeyInfo type URIs
- Re: KeyInfo type URIs
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- RE: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: KeyInfo type URIs
Wednesday, 11 April 2001
- RE: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Java APIs for XMLDSIG
- RE: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- RE: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Re: KeyInfo type URIs
- Re: KeyInfo type URIs
- Re: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- RE: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
Tuesday, 10 April 2001
- Re: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- AW: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- RE: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- new example signature
- Re: KeyInfo type URIs
- KeyInfo type URIs
- Re: AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Prepping Next Version of Signature Spec
- Re: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
Monday, 9 April 2001
- Re: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Re: Misspelled xPointer in current draft
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Prepping Next Version of Signature Spec
- Re: Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Misspelled xPointer in current draft
- AW: Schema definition for <Transform>
Friday, 6 April 2001
Thursday, 5 April 2001
- Re: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Implementors: Please Update Interop Matrix
- Re: Schema definition for <Transform>
- Re: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
- Namespace Resolution is Now Content Negotiated
Wednesday, 4 April 2001
- Re: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
- Re: Prepping Next Version of Signature Spec
- Re: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
- Re: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
Tuesday, 3 April 2001
- RE: Prepping Next Version of Signature Spec
- Prepping Next Version of Signature Spec
- Re: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
- RE: XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
- XML DSIG Algorithm URNs
- Re: XML DSIG Typo - Section 6.2
- Re: Schema definition for <Transform>