Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3029 (6444)

Russ Housley <[email protected]> writes:

>That said, if there is no imperest in implementation, I do not want to work
>too hard on this...

Maybe it should be a requirement than when the IETF publishes a spec no-one
cares about there be a few deliberate errors (copiers' traps) put in there so
that, on the off chance someone does try and implement it, we hear about it...

I've actually got that in my code for some of the more obscure PKIX features.
In 25+ years no-one has ever reported anything, which is why they've been
disabled by default (apart from the error you get if you try and use them) for
years for attack surface reduction purposes.

Peter.