- From: Tom Gindin <tgindin@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 20:24:29 -0500
- To: Serge Dussault <serge.dussault@ramq.gouv.qc.ca>
- Cc: "'w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
The X509Certificate element appears to restrict the certificate specified to a v3 certificate, thus excluding attribute certificates. IMO it would be better to put an AC into a SignatureProperty anyway, so the signer could sign which AC he intends to use. RFC 2634 has a place to put AC's, and section 1.3.4 of that specification says in that regard that "signingCertificate MUST be carried in a SignedAttributes". It is not clear that you can use AC's as an alternative to PKC's to specify the signer in RFC 2630. I would think that you might not be able to because you have to specify the signer by issuerAndSerialNumber or by subjectKeyIdentifier, and issuerAndSerialNumber uses version 1 to indicate backward compatibility with PKCS#7 before the days of AC's. Anyway, if people agree with me that a SignatureProperty is the right place for an AC in this format, should we standardize a format and name one? My own guess would be that the name of this signature property would be "AttributeCert" (if people prefer to be wordy and spell out Certificate they are welcome to) and that its format would be the binary value of the AC converted to base 64, just as for X509Certificate. However, there is no place to include the chain of certificates leading to an AC. CRL's are not constrained to point at PKC's by the definition of X509Data, so you can put your CRL's there. Do we need a chain for AC's as well? A very simple way to do it would be to require that the contents of the AttributeCert SignatureProperty be a delimited ordered set of certificates. Since any subsequent certificates in the path may be either AC's or PKC's, we must distinguish between them and the two simplest ways I can think of are either by a rule that an AC follows a comma while a PKC follows a colon, or by preceding all PKC's in the list by "P:". Somebody else can come up with more native-XML like syntax if they wish. Tom Gindin Serge Dussault <serge.dussault@ramq.gouv.qc.ca>@w3.org on 03/22/2002 02:12:37 PM Sent by: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org To: "'w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org> cc: Subject: Attribute certificate Hi, is it possible to use a attribute certificate in this specification (XML-DSIG)? If yes, is it possible to have a sample code? Thanks Serge Dussault Soutien au développement Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec Tél. : (418) 682-5159 poste 4570 Téléc. : (418) 528-9231 Courriel : serge.dussault@ramq.gouv.qc.ca
Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 20:25:13 UTC