|
Re: Authentication vs. binding signature, and ephemeral vs.permanent key : msg#00327ietf.x509
Aram, Aram Perez wrote: > > Hi David, > > See my questions below: > > >Aram Perez wrote: > ><snip> > >> 3) It is not clear to me who determines the value of the keyUsage > >> field. > >> Does the CA arbitrarily assigned it, or do I specify the field in the > >> certificate request? And if non-repudiation is a CA service, how do I know > >> the > >> CA will set the NR bit? > > > >The CA will insert whatever the subject, or the organization granting > >the subject the certificate, has contracted with the CA to insert, > >assuming the subject meets applicable requirements for the cert. > > When I go to the VeriSign site and apply for either a Class 1 or Class 2 > certificate, I see no place where I can tell VeriSign that I want the NR bit > set. And how people are going to read 116 pages of VeriSign's CSP? I won't vouch for any particular vendor, but I would suspect that any CA that you contract with will create certificates that meet your needs. If they won't, then find another CA. > > >> > >> 4) How is the private key involved? What happens if the corresponding > >> certificate has the NR bit set but I use the private key to sign an > >> ephemeral > >> object? Ditto for having the NR bit NOT set but I use the private key to > >> do a > >> "conscious" signature? > > > >If the extension is "critical" and the key is not used in a manner > >appropriate to its indication, the processing application (recipient) > >should reject the transaction. > > It appears that you are assuming that signing function accepts the certificate > as a parameter. I know of no cryptographic API that takes a certificate as a > parameter to a sign (or even verify) operation. All of the APIs I know (which > may be a limited set), always take a private key for signing and a public key > for verifying. None of them take a certificate. If you are verifying a digital signature, I am certainly assuming the use of a public key. Whether the public key is transferred in the protocol, retrieved from an X.500 Directory, or queried from a relational database, a certificate is the accepted method for conveying the public key. If we are not discussing public key certificates here, then our discussion is useless. > > Thanks for your comments, > Aram Perez > Apple Computer, Inc. -- David Simonetti, Booz·Allen & Hamilton Inc. |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Authentication vs. binding signature, and ephemeral vs.permanent key usage: 00327, Aram Perez |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Authentication vs. binding signature, and ephemeral vs.permanent key usage: 00327, Aram Perez |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Authentication vs. binding signature, and ephemeral vs.permanent key usagei: 00327, Aram Perez |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Authentication vs. binding signature, and ephemeral vs.permanent key usage: 00327, Aram Perez |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |