[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: source of "Friendly name"

To: md@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: source of "Friendly name"
From: yannick quenechdu <yquenechdu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 00:29:55 +0100
Cc: ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1280.84.240.23.130.1170109521.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-pkix/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-pkix-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <BAY106-F147009159F7CA317BE703FCA70@xxxxxxx> <> <7.0.0.16.2.20070129155820.04b31c80@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1280.84.240.23.130.1170109521.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-ietf-pkix@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)


Moudrick M. Dadashov a écrit :

Hello,

anybody knows what is the source of so called "Friendly Name" displayed by
Microsoft certificate viewer? I can't find any extensions for this field
either.

The cert associated with the private key had "friendly name" associatedwith it. Is similar with alias in JKS file or see

openssl when you create PKCS12, you have a option "Friendly Name".

Note : friendly names are optional in windows but required by NSS(mozilla). If the PKCS12 file was created without a

friendly name for the cert, that's why it failed.

Regards
Yannick Quenec(hdu
www.ejbca.org / PKI Opensource

Follow-Ups:
- Re: source of "Friendly name"
  - From: Francis Dupont

References:
- RE: SHA 1 vs. SHA 256 for Root CA
  - From: ROGER YOUNGLOVE
- RE: SHA 1 vs. SHA 256 for Root CA
  - From: Stephen Kent
- RE: SHA 1 vs. SHA 256 for Root CA
  - From: Russ Housley
- source of "Friendly name"
  - From: Moudrick M. Dadashov

Prev by Date: source of "Friendly name"
Next by Date: Re: URN in subjectAltName
Previous by thread: source of "Friendly name"
Next by thread: Re: source of "Friendly name"
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread