RE: rsa-sha2-256/512: handling of incorrect signature encoding
Peter Gutmann <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.secsh |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4CDEE4D@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> |
denis bider (Bitvise) <[email protected]> writes: >I did set up a test server for the new rsa-sha2-XXX signature types; I posted >connection information here, and included instructions to test both server and >client authentication. I was under the impression that you might have used it, >but I’m not sure if you did. I did, but not for pubkey auth, for lack of a key to auth with. Is it worth stating, in the draft, that if you use sha256 everywhere else then you should also use it for pubkey auth? I can't see any reason why you'd want to use SHA-1 for that when you're using SHA-2 for everything else. Then you could also use the server's advertising SHA-2 to indicate that it'll take a SHA-2 sig for auth. Peter.