[pkix] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5280 (8789 )

Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]> Tue, 3 Mar 2026 19:32:59 +0000
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.x509
Message-ID <SN7PR14MB649277FF0B9F8D7824393895837FA@SN7PR14MB6492.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
--===============2845107245731276787==
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="_000_SN7PR14MB649277FF0B9F8D7824393895837FASN7PR14MB6492namp_"

--_000_SN7PR14MB649277FF0B9F8D7824393895837FASN7PR14MB6492namp_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think it should be rejected as well. I actually have lots of strong feeli=
ngs on this issue, but the original text is not wrong.

-Tim
________________________________
From: Michael StJohns <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 12:29 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [pkix] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5280 (8789)

What Sean said.  I'd actually be inclined to reject the errata as a) it
is in a comment, and b) the fact that people are using this for non-WWW
stuff does not change the behavior for WWW stuff.

Mike

On 3/3/2026 11:47, Sean Turner wrote:
> If we want to remove the =93WWW=94 from the comment sure, but please mark=
 this as =93Editorial" as the suggested changes are in an ASN.1 comment ;)
>
> spt
>
>> On Feb 27, 2026, at 21:23, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> This errata report is correct and should be marked as "hold for document=
 update".
>>
>> --Paul Hoffman
>>
>> On 27 Feb 2026, at 17:28, RFC Errata System wrote:
>>
>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5280,
>>> "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate R=
evocation List (CRL) Profile".
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8789
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Type: Technical
>>> Reported by: Elizabeth Peraza Slator <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Section: GLOBAL
>>>
>>> Original Text
>>> -------------
>>> Section 4.2.1.12 says:
>>>
>>>    id-kp-serverAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 1 }
>>>    -- TLS WWW server authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature,
>>>    -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement
>>>
>>>    id-kp-clientAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 2 }
>>>    -- TLS WWW client authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature
>>>    -- and/or keyAgreement
>>> It should say:
>>>
>>>    id-kp-serverAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 1 }
>>>    -- TLS server authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature,
>>>    -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement
>>>
>>>    id-kp-clientAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 2 }
>>>    -- TLS client authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature
>>>    -- and/or keyAgreement
>>> Notes:
>>>
>>> The proposed change removes the WWW part of the description. In practic=
e these object identifiers are used for server and client applications, but=
 not necessarily web applications. In particular:
>>> - openssl verification considers them unconditionally even if the serve=
r is not a web server or the client a web client
>>> - There is no object identifier that can be used for protocols like SMT=
P, IMAP, POP3, LDAP, radius, ...; in practice all these protocols are deplo=
yed with the identifiers for WWW
>>> - Standards like common criteria assume that these object identifiers a=
re for generic server and clients [0].
>>>
>>> [0]. https://www.niap-ccevs.org/MMO/PP/-442-/#FCS_TLSC_EXT.1.1
>>>
>>> Report New Errata
>>>
>>> Corrected Text
>>> --------------
>>> Section 4.2.1.12 says:
>>>
>>>    id-kp-serverAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 1 }
>>>    -- TLS WWW server authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature,
>>>    -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement
>>>
>>>    id-kp-clientAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 2 }
>>>    -- TLS WWW client authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature
>>>    -- and/or keyAgreement
>>> It should say:
>>>
>>>    id-kp-serverAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 1 }
>>>    -- TLS server authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature,
>>>    -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement
>>>
>>>    id-kp-clientAuth             OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-kp 2 }
>>>    -- TLS client authentication
>>>    -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: digitalSignature
>>>    -- and/or keyAgreement
>>> Notes:
>>>
>>> The proposed change removes the WWW part of the description. In practic=
e these object identifiers are used for server and client applications, but=
 not necessarily web applications. In particular:
>>> - openssl verification considers them unconditionally even if the serve=
r is not a web server or the client a web client
>>> - There is no object identifier that can be used for protocols like SMT=
P, IMAP, POP3, LDAP, radius, ...; in practice all these protocols are deplo=
yed with the identifiers for WWW
>>> - Standards like common criteria assume that these object identifiers a=
re for generic server and clients [0].
>>>
>>> [0]. https://www.niap-ccevs.org/MMO/PP/-442-/#FCS_TLSC_EXT.1.1
>>>
>>> Report New Errata
>>>
>>> Notes
>>> -----
>>> Thank you very much
>>>
>>> Instructions:
>>> -------------
>>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
>>> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
>>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
>>> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> RFC5280 (draft-ietf-pkix-rfc3280bis-11)
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Title               : Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certific=
ate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile
>>> Publication Date    : May 2008
>>> Author(s)           : D. Cooper, S. Santesson, S. Farrell, S. Boeyen, R=
. Housley, W. Polk
>>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>>> Source              : Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)
>>> Stream              : IETF
>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkix mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> pkix mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]


_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

--_000_SN7PR14MB649277FF0B9F8D7824393895837FASN7PR14MB6492namp_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3DWindows-1=
252">
<style type=3D"text/css" style=3D"display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bo=
ttom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir=3D"ltr">
<div style=3D"font-family: Aptos, Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, =
Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" clas=
s=3D"elementToProof">
I think it should be rejected as well. I actually have lots of strong feeli=
ngs on this issue, but the original text is not wrong.</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Aptos, Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, =
Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" clas=
s=3D"elementToProof">
<br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Aptos, Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, =
Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" clas=
s=3D"elementToProof">
-Tim</div>
<div id=3D"appendonsend"></div>
<hr style=3D"display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex=3D"-1">
<div id=3D"divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" st=
yle=3D"font-size:11pt" color=3D"#000000"><b>From:</b> Michael StJohns &lt;m=
[email protected]&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 3, 2026 12:29 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> [email protected] &lt;[email protected]&gt;<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [pkix] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5280 (8789)</font=
>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
</div>
<div class=3D"BodyFragment"><font size=3D"2"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt;=
">
<div class=3D"PlainText">What Sean said.&nbsp; I'd actually be inclined to =
reject the errata as a) it
<br>
is in a comment, and b) the fact that people are using this for non-WWW <br=
>
stuff does not change the behavior for WWW stuff.<br>
<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
On 3/3/2026 11:47, Sean Turner wrote:<br>
&gt; If we want to remove the =93WWW=94 from the comment sure, but please m=
ark this as =93Editorial&quot; as the suggested changes are in an ASN.1 com=
ment ;)<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; spt<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; On Feb 27, 2026, at 21:23, Paul Hoffman &lt;[email protected]&gt=
; wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; This errata report is correct and should be marked as &quot;hold f=
or document update&quot;.<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; --Paul Hoffman<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; On 27 Feb 2026, at 17:28, RFC Errata System wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5280,<br=
>
&gt;&gt;&gt; &quot;Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and=
 Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile&quot;.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; --------------------------------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; You may review the report below and at:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; <a href=3D"https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8789">https://=
www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8789</a><br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; --------------------------------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Type: Technical<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Reported by: Elizabeth Peraza Slator &lt;elizabethpslator@gmai=
l.com&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Section: GLOBAL<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Original Text<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; -------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Section 4.2.1.12 says:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-serverAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 1 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS WWW server authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-clientAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 2 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS WWW client authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- and/or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; It should say:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-serverAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 1 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS server authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-clientAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 2 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS client authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- and/or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Notes:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; The proposed change removes the WWW part of the description. I=
n practice these object identifiers are used for server and client applicat=
ions, but not necessarily web applications. In particular:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; - openssl verification considers them unconditionally even if =
the server is not a web server or the client a web client<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; - There is no object identifier that can be used for protocols=
 like SMTP, IMAP, POP3, LDAP, radius, ...; in practice all these protocols =
are deployed with the identifiers for WWW<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; - Standards like common criteria assume that these object iden=
tifiers are for generic server and clients [0].<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; [0]. <a href=3D"https://www.niap-ccevs.org/MMO/PP/-442-/#FCS_T=
LSC_EXT.1.1">https://www.niap-ccevs.org/MMO/PP/-442-/#FCS_TLSC_EXT.1.1</a><=
br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Report New Errata<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Corrected Text<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; --------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Section 4.2.1.12 says:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-serverAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 1 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS WWW server authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-clientAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 2 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS WWW client authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- and/or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; It should say:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-serverAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 1 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS server authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature,<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- keyEncipherment or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; id-kp-clientAuth&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=3D { id-k=
p 2 }<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- TLS client authentication<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- Key usage bits that may be consistent: di=
gitalSignature<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -- and/or keyAgreement<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Notes:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; The proposed change removes the WWW part of the description. I=
n practice these object identifiers are used for server and client applicat=
ions, but not necessarily web applications. In particular:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; - openssl verification considers them unconditionally even if =
the server is not a web server or the client a web client<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; - There is no object identifier that can be used for protocols=
 like SMTP, IMAP, POP3, LDAP, radius, ...; in practice all these protocols =
are deployed with the identifiers for WWW<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; - Standards like common criteria assume that these object iden=
tifiers are for generic server and clients [0].<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; [0]. <a href=3D"https://www.niap-ccevs.org/MMO/PP/-442-/#FCS_T=
LSC_EXT.1.1">https://www.niap-ccevs.org/MMO/PP/-442-/#FCS_TLSC_EXT.1.1</a><=
br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Report New Errata<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Notes<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; -----<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Thank you very much<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Instructions:<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; -------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; This erratum is currently posted as &quot;Reported&quot;. (If =
it is spam, it<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please<=
br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; use &quot;Reply All&quot; to discuss whether it should be veri=
fied or<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; will log in to change the status and edit the report, if neces=
sary.<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; --------------------------------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; RFC5280 (draft-ietf-pkix-rfc3280bis-11)<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; --------------------------------------<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Title&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; : Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Cert=
ificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Publication Date&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; : May 2008<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Author(s)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp; : D. Cooper, S. Santesson, S. Farrell, S. Boeyen, R. Housley, W. Po=
lk<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Category&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
&nbsp;&nbsp; : PROPOSED STANDARD<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Source&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; : Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Stream&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; : IETF<br>
&gt;&gt;&gt; Verifying Party&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; : IESG<br>
&gt;&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt;&gt; pkix mailing list -- [email protected]<br>
&gt;&gt; To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; pkix mailing list -- [email protected]<br>
&gt; To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
pkix mailing list -- [email protected]<br>
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>

--_000_SN7PR14MB649277FF0B9F8D7824393895837FASN7PR14MB6492namp_--


--===============2845107245731276787==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline

X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KcGtpeCBtYWls
aW5nIGxpc3QgLS0gcGtpeEBpZXRmLm9yZwpUbyB1bnN1YnNjcmliZSBzZW5kIGFuIGVtYWlsIHRv
IHBraXgtbGVhdmVAaWV0Zi5vcmcK

--===============2845107245731276787==--