Re: Amendment to CABF Baseline Requirements

Erwann Abalea <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.x509
Message-ID <CA+i=0E5Bh=_b1ZK2T_Y9bj6GivtOJq2Y23i071=wS=jph68tog@mail.gmail.com>
Bonjour,

2017-04-06 22:39 GMT+02:00 Peter Bowen <[email protected]>:

>
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 12:24 PM Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The comment in the UpperBounds ASN.1 module (the 8th edition) says:
>>
>> -- EXPORTS All
>> -- The types and values defined in this module are exported for use in
>> the other ASN.1
>> -- modules contained within these Directory Specifications, and for the
>> use of other
>> -- applications which will use them to access Directory services. Other
>> applications
>> -- may use them for their own purposes, but this will not constrain
>> extensions and
>> -- modifications needed to maintain or improve the Directory service.
>>
>> X.509 is part of the Directory Specifications, so they are not advisory.
>>
>> It looks like ITU-T increased the length of the organizational unit name
>> in the most recent edition.
>>
>> RFC 5280 says:
>>
>> ub-organization-name-length INTEGER ::= 64
>> ub-organizational-unit-name-length INTEGER ::= 32
>>
>> The UpperBounds ASN.1 module (the 8th edition) says:
>>
>> ub-organization-name                       INTEGER ::= 64
>> ub-organizational-unit-name                INTEGER ::= 64
>>
>> So, we may already be in a place where implementations conforming to
>> X.509 will produce a certificate that cannot be decoded by an
>> implementation that conforms to RFC 5280.
>>
>> I wish we gad gotten a heads-up …
>
>
> It is even worse. 7th and 8th (and maybe prior releases) removed the usage
> of ub- from the schema. The schema itself no longer bounds DirectoryStrings
> and X.509 explicitly says they are unbounded.
>

X.520 2005 defines the attributes using the DirectoryString{} parameterized
type, while the 2008 edition uses the UnboundedDirectoryString type.

RFC5912, which proposes ASN.1 modules for certificates and other related
things, still uses the DirectoryString{} variant.

-- 
Erwann.

_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.