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

RE: NEW Data type for certificate selection ?



 

Please consider the following matching rules for certificates, based on
the X.500 series.  I would really like to see products developed that
can invoke them (as client) and products developed that can retrieve
them from the storage (as repository).  I am not advocating this exact
syntax, but something very similar would be extremely beneficial.
Sandi

>----------
>From: 	Stefan Santesson[SMTP:stefan@accurata.se]
>Sent: 	Thursday, September 24, 1998 8:41 AM
>To: 	ietf-pkix@imc.org; list@seis.nc-forum.com; ietf-tls@consensus.com;
>cert-talk@structuredarts.com
>Subject: 	NEW Data type for certificate selection ?
>
>All,
>
>During the TLS session in Chicago (IETF meeting) I discussed with Jeff
>Weinstein, Netscape, the problem of certificate selection in an environment
>where the client is populated with many similar certificates for different
>purposes.
>
>We concluded that this is a general problem, not only for TLS, but for
>S/MIME, Java, Java script, etc, where signing and encryption based on an
>X.509 PKI is an option. I also conclude that the current TLS approach,
>using Issuer name as selection criteria, is hopelessly insufficient for the
>general case.
>
>In fact we can NEVER claim that we have an X.509 based architecture ready
>for the big market IF WE DON'T SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.
>
>A normal user (I.e grandmother) will never be able to pick the right
>certificate by herself, if there is more than 1 to pick.
>
>The question raised here is:
>
>WOULD A STANDARDIZED DATA TYPE FOR CERTIFICATE SELECTION BE A GOOD START.
>
>If we could create a standardized ASN.1 data type with the purpose of
>defining the criteria for selecting 1 out of n certificates, then this
>could be used as a common base for enhancing TLS, Java, Java script, S/MIME
>etc.
>
>The data type could be communicated from server to client, client to
>server, server to server, client to client; I.e in any case where one party
>which to assist another party in selecting an appropriate certificate for
>any purpose (defined by the context).
>
>Do anyone have a better idea.
>
>I think this is a lost problem that has to be fixed, hopefully in a
>standardized way.
>
>Comments, suggestions.
>
>/Stefan Santesson
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Stefan Santesson                <stefan@accurata.se>
>Accurata Systemsäkerhet AB     
>Lotsgatan 27 D                  Tel. +46-40 152211              
>216 42  Malmö                   Fax. +46-40 150790              
>Sweden                        Mobile +46-70 5247799
>
>PGP fingerprint: 89BC 6C79 5B3D 591B 8547  1512 7D11 DBF4 528F 29A0
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Attachment: MATCH.DOC
Description: MS-Word document