Re: X.509 certificate and its subject name field

[Nick Pope <pope@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In reply to your message of 27 May 97, 19:08:

One solution is to use a national ID scheme.  In the UK all employed 
people are given a National Insurance number which is unqiue to them 
and doesn't change over their lifetime.  There may 
be however some privacy questions with such a scheme

Nick Pope

> Steve,
> 
> Let's think what happens during a corporate reorganization, company
> mergers, or country unifications (:)).   Names and directories may
> change!  If UID's are embedded in names and if applications do not
> carve out the UID's for use in authorization decisions/ACL's, then we
> will have a BIG trouble!  If it is suggested that applications will
> have to pick up the UID from within the subject name, then it should
> be made clear in the spec.  But, then how would non-X500 names be
> dealt with when they are supported???  Why don't we suggest the use of
> the Subject UID field, then sit back and relax.
> 
> On May 27,  1:46pm, Stephen Kent wrote:
> > Subject: Re: X.509 certificate and its subject name field
> > Shyh-Wei,
> >
> >       I think that, for organizational persons, a second component for
> > the terminal RDN would usually be something that those managing the local
> > namespace would see as natural, i.e., it is something like an employee ID
> > number that has already been assigned and thus is not an arbitrary string
> > like the Subject UID.
> 
> Why can't an employee ID number be used as ths Subject UID, if the ID
> is never reused?
> 
> >
> >-- End of excerpt from Stephen Kent
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------


Security & Standards
Suite A
191 Moulsham St.
Chelmsford
Essex
CM2 0LG
U.K.

Tel: +44 1245 495018
Fax: +44 1245 494517