Maxim Masiutin | 10 May 22:45 2010

ESSCertIDv2 rfc5035 sample

Hello Smime,

  Could you please send me a sample signed data with ESSCertIDv2 along with a new attribute SigningCertificateV2?

  AFAIK, this attribute is required for E.U. qualified signatures.

  I was searching the internet for examples of such signatures (e.g. an S/MIME message or a small .p7s file
accompanying a document) abut didn't find anything.

  Your help would be appreciated.

--

-- 
Best regards,
Maxim Masiutin                          mailto:max <at> ritlabs.com

_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime

Peter Rybar | 11 May 09:57 2010
Picon

Re: ESSCertIDv2 rfc5035 sample

It is implemented in EPLI2

Peter

2010/5/10 Maxim Masiutin <max <at> ritlabs.com>
Hello Smime,

 Could you please send me a sample signed data with ESSCertIDv2 along with a new attribute SigningCertificateV2?

 AFAIK, this attribute is required for E.U. qualified signatures.

 I was searching the internet for examples of such signatures (e.g. an S/MIME message or a small .p7s file accompanying a document) abut didn't find anything.

 Your help would be appreciated.

--
Best regards,
Maxim Masiutin                          mailto:max <at> ritlabs.com

_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime

_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime
Peter Rybar | 11 May 10:00 2010
Picon

Re: ESSCertIDv2 rfc5035 sample

Sample is at the page
Peter


2010/5/11 Peter Rybar <peterryb <at> gmail.com>
It is implemented in EPLI2

Peter

2010/5/10 Maxim Masiutin <max <at> ritlabs.com>

Hello Smime,

 Could you please send me a sample signed data with ESSCertIDv2 along with a new attribute SigningCertificateV2?

 AFAIK, this attribute is required for E.U. qualified signatures.

 I was searching the internet for examples of such signatures (e.g. an S/MIME message or a small .p7s file accompanying a document) abut didn't find anything.

 Your help would be appreciated.

--
Best regards,
Maxim Masiutin                          mailto:max <at> ritlabs.com

_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime


_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime
The IESG | 27 May 16:46 2010
Picon

Last Call: rfc5652 (Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)) to Full Standard

The IESG has received a request from the smime WG (smime) to consider the 
following document:

- 'Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) '
  RFC 5652 as a Full Standard

This specification contains normative down references to Proposed
Standards RFCs 5280 and 3281.  The community previously reviewed
these downrefs when CMS (then RFC 3852) was Last Called for publication
as Draft Standard.  The IESG would like to confirm that the community is
still comfortable with the maturity of these specifications when
referenced by a Full Standard.

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to the
ietf <at> ietf.org mailing lists by 2010-06-10. Exceptionally, 
comments may be sent to iesg <at> ietf.org instead. In either case, please 
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5652.txt

Implementation Report can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/implementation.html

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=5652&rfc_flag=1

_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime

Paul Hoffman | 27 May 17:15 2010
Picon

Re: Last Call: rfc5652 (Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)) to Full Standard

At 7:46 AM -0700 5/27/10, The IESG wrote:
>The IESG has received a request from the smime WG (smime) to consider the
>following document:
>
>- 'Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) '
>  RFC 5652 as a Full Standard
>
>This specification contains normative down references to Proposed
>Standards RFCs 5280 and 3281.  The community previously reviewed
>these downrefs when CMS (then RFC 3852) was Last Called for publication
>as Draft Standard.  The IESG would like to confirm that the community is
>still comfortable with the maturity of these specifications when
>referenced by a Full Standard.

I believe that RFC 5280 (PKIX) is likely to change in small ways that affect interoperability with the
current version of PKIX, but I think it will do so in ways that do not directly pertain to the stability of
CMS. That is, even if PKIX changes somewhat post-5280, that is not a good enough reason to say "nothing that
relies on PKIX can advance until the PKIX WG promises never to change the PKIX spec again".

Attribute certificates (RFC 3281) seems quite stable.
_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime

Peter Gutmann | 28 May 07:52 2010
Picon
Picon
Picon

Re: Last Call: rfc5652 (Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)) to Full Standard

Paul Hoffman <phoffman <at> imc.org> writes:

>I believe that RFC 5280 (PKIX) is likely to change in small ways that affect
>interoperability with the current version of PKIX

This is a permanent state of affairs so the above statement will be apropos no
matter which year it's made in (or was made in).  This isn't something that
can be remedied by waiting for any particular rev of PKIX to be published.  So
I'd say go ahead with publishing 5652.

Peter.
_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
smime <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime


Gmane