Re: RSA vs. DSA MUST

["Bonatti, Chris" <BonattiC@xxxxxxxx>]

Enzo Michelangeli wrote:

> Here is my modest proposal for SMIME v.3 sole MUST requirements:
>
> - Full interoperability with SMIME v.2, therefore #include-ing all the MUST
> of RFC2311;
> - Minimum key length raised to 1024-bit for PK and 112-bit for symmetric
> algorithms;
> - At least one other key exchange algorithm and one signature algorithm
> unrelated to the problem of modular factorization, to protect against
> possible unpleasant effects of progress in numbers theory. I'd say that DSA
> and DH are the best candidates, if we want to exorcise the IP curse that
> could strike ECC-based techniques;
> - 3DES-EDE and Rijndael added to RC2.
>
> Cheers --
>
> Enzo

Enzo,

This isn't actually too modest in my view.  In terms of numbers of things
supported it's not too far from where we are now (just a few attributes).  I
would support this with one addition.  I think you *need* to support the
'SMIMECapabilities' on reception.  This just seems like a necessity in any
environment that supports multiple algorithms.  Otherwise, you have all you need
for basic interoperability.

Chris