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

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pkix-usergroup-01.txt




At 7:01 AM +0100 10/29/02, Anders Rundgren wrote:
<snip>
Another disadvantage to mapping is that it creates another
opportunity to make errors, i.e., in mapping from the certificate
space to the application space. the database needed to perform the
map is an additional source of errors, or an additional attack point,
and generally lacks the integrity afforded to certs.

Dear Steve,


In other more established sectors of the IT-industry, the need
for mappings have been reduced by introducing globally
agreed-upon identifiers like UNSPC for product codes.
PKI is literally decades behind, where people still are fighting
about the very basics, like where to put and how to interpret identity
information, here referring to Subject DNs, SubjectAltNames,
URIs, PIs, e-mail addresses, DUNS numbers, etc.

Unless we are talking private and closed PKIs, mapping
is still a necessary evil for most systems.

We have lots of options for globally unique identifiers, but none are globally meaningful, which is the root cause of this problem.


Could it be that focusing on a model of global, TTP PKIs creates the need for mapping to which you allude? If so, there there is an easy way to avoid this problem, right?

Steve