S/MIME Mail Security (smime)

The IESG | 6 Feb 2006 23:00

Protocol Action: 'Using the GOST 28147-89, GOST R 34.11-94, GOST R 34.10-94 and GOST R 34.10-2001 algorithms with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)' to Proposed Standard


The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Using the GOST 28147-89, GOST R 34.11-94, GOST R 34.10-94 and GOST R 
   34.10-2001 algorithms with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) '
   <draft-ietf-smime-gost-07.txt> as a Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the S/MIME Mail Security Working Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Russ Housley and Sam Hartman.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-smime-gost-07.txt

Technical Summary

  This Internet Draft describes the conventions for using GOST (Russian
  national standard) set of symmetric cryptographic algorithms
  (signature, key management, and MAC) and their use with Cryptographic
  Message Syntax (CMS).  Object identifiers for algorithms, ASN.1 for
  parameters, and example encoded CMS messages are provided.

  Additional documents related to this Internet-Draft are:
     draft-popov-cryptopro-cpalgs-04.txt
     draft-ietf-pkix-gost-cppk-03.txt

Working Group Summary

  There was little list discussion of the Internet-Draft; however, there
  was working group member review provided primarily face-to-face

(Continue reading)

headers

Blake Ramsdell | 2 Mar 2006 10:44

Re: Multi-level CMS Signature evaluation Rules: Document Location


On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:52 AM, Russ Housley wrote:
> This has lead to very little discussion.  I am pleased to propose  
> the text for CMS if that is the direction that the S/MIME WG wants  
> to pursue.  Please pick a direction.  We need to get moving.

OK, well I guess I'm picking it. Russ, please propose some text for  
this in CMS, per Jim's option 1 below. The path here seems to be  
reopening CMS for the purpose of adding this clarification.

Multiple signatures will be on the agenda for IETF 65.

> At 05:09 PM 12/4/2005, Jim Schaad wrote:
>>
>> 1) CMS Base specification
>>         Pro:
>>                 - This is core functionality and it would be seen  
>> by all
>> implementers of CMS
>>                 - It would deal with ALL CMS objects
>>
>>         Con:
>>                 - The document is not currently open for changes
>>                 - Depending on how it is written, it might be more  
>> open to
>> changes in the future

Blake
--
Blake Ramsdell | Sendmail, Inc. | http://www.sendmail.com

(Continue reading)

headers

Russ Housley | 2 Mar 2006 20:02

Re: Multi-level CMS Signature evaluation Rules: Document Location


Blake:

I will propose text.  However, I am not in favor of opening CMS.  I 
think we can generate a one or two paragraph update.

Russ

At 04:44 AM 3/2/2006, Blake Ramsdell wrote:
>On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:52 AM, Russ Housley wrote:
>>This has lead to very little discussion.  I am pleased to propose
>>the text for CMS if that is the direction that the S/MIME WG wants
>>to pursue.  Please pick a direction.  We need to get moving.
>
>OK, well I guess I'm picking it. Russ, please propose some text for
>this in CMS, per Jim's option 1 below. The path here seems to be
>reopening CMS for the purpose of adding this clarification.
>
>Multiple signatures will be on the agenda for IETF 65.
>
>>At 05:09 PM 12/4/2005, Jim Schaad wrote:
>>>
>>>1) CMS Base specification
>>>         Pro:
>>>                 - This is core functionality and it would be seen
>>>by all
>>>implementers of CMS
>>>                 - It would deal with ALL CMS objects
>>>
>>>         Con:

(Continue reading)

headers

Blake Ramsdell | 2 Mar 2006 20:44

Re: Multi-level CMS Signature evaluation Rules: Document Location

On Mar 2, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Russ Housley wrote:
> I will propose text.  However, I am not in favor of opening CMS.  I  
> think we can generate a one or two paragraph update.

OK, I was overly specific about the mechanism. I think the sprit here  
is that this is going to be a CMS-level change so that any consumer  
of CMS will benefit from it. The actual form of that change is indeed  
whatever makes the "most sense".

Blake
--
Blake Ramsdell | Sendmail, Inc. | http://www.sendmail.com


Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Sun

1	June 2013
9	May 2013
3	April 2013
7	September 2012
1	February 2012
1	August 2011
1	July 2011
2	June 2011
7	April 2011
8	March 2011
5	February 2011
13	January 2011
7	December 2010
7	November 2010
2	October 2010
7	September 2010
11	August 2010
21	June 2010
6	May 2010
11	April 2010
6	March 2010
3	February 2010
9	January 2010
1	October 2009
3	September 2009
8	August 2009
6	July 2009
8	June 2009
31	May 2009
23	April 2009
24	March 2009
10	February 2009
81	January 2009
76	December 2008
19	November 2008
37	October 2008
34	September 2008
27	August 2008
23	July 2008
30	June 2008
79	May 2008
20	April 2008
41	March 2008
24	February 2008
33	January 2008
27	December 2007
33	November 2007
41	October 2007
24	September 2007
30	August 2007
20	July 2007
25	June 2007
34	May 2007
59	April 2007
19	March 2007
13	February 2007
59	January 2007
27	December 2006
24	November 2006
12	October 2006
2	September 2006
3	August 2006
6	July 2006
10	June 2006
21	May 2006
17	April 2006
20	March 2006
1	February 2006
8	January 2006
17	December 2005
17	November 2005
3	October 2005
10	September 2005
6	August 2005
16	July 2005
16	June 2005
3	May 2005
2	April 2005
2	March 2005
30	February 2005
15	January 2005
10	December 2004
9	November 2004
7	October 2004
72	September 2004
20	August 2004
33	July 2004
22	June 2004
23	May 2004
35	April 2004
54	March 2004
9	February 2004
9	January 2004
13	December 2003
13	November 2003
34	October 2003
14	September 2003
74	August 2003
53	July 2003
54	June 2003
34	May 2003
22	April 2003
26	March 2003
22	February 2003
15	January 2003
11	December 2002
9	November 2002
30	October 2002
24	September 2002
38	August 2002
31	July 2002
14	June 2002
36	May 2002
30	April 2002
31	March 2002
29	February 2002
6	January 2002
44	December 2001
14	November 2001
60	October 2001
61	September 2001
78	August 2001
118	July 2001
25	June 2001
29	May 2001
61	April 2001
34	March 2001
38	February 2001
29	January 2001
29	December 2000
68	November 2000
21	October 2000
21	September 2000
52	August 2000
23	July 2000
43	June 2000
65	May 2000
34	April 2000
41	March 2000
40	February 2000
4	January 2000
30	December 1999
64	November 1999
41	October 1999
23	September 1999
45	August 1999
50	July 1999
37	June 1999
44	May 1999
26	April 1999
78	March 1999
113	February 1999
71	January 1999
95	December 1998
113	November 1998
74	October 1998
96	September 1998
55	August 1998
74	July 1998
50	June 1998
155	May 1998
161	April 1998
248	March 1998
233	February 1998
163	January 1998
152	December 1997
306	November 1997
64	October 1997
72	September 1997
17	August 1997
88	July 1997
21	June 1997
53	May 1997
123	April 1997
2	March 1997
2	February 1997
17	January 1997
2	December 1996