OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

pkcs11 message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: KEM Comments


I seem to be having trouble receiving all emails sent via the reflector. In particular, Bob’s don’t come through for some reason. I apologize if anyone else has mentioned these.

 

  1. I prefer C_Encapsulate and C_Decapsulate over C_EncapsulateKey/C_DecapsulateKey. My understanding is that the value encapsulated, and the value output from decapsulation, should not be directly used as a key.
  2. pkcs11_kem_algs_draft2.pdf section 1.1.4: I think this should, somehow, make it clear that the paragraph following “This mechanism can encapsulate and decapsulate keys according to RSASVE…” doesn’t apply to encapsulation/decapsulation. Moving that RSASVE sentence before the wrap and unwrap paragraph might do it.
  3. pkcs11_kem_algs_draft2.pdf section 1.4.3, pkcs11_pq_sig_algs_2 sections 1.1.3, 1.2.3, and 1.3.3: Our applications start most operations in PKCS#11 with a certificate. They then attempt to find a private key on the device matching the certificate. For RSA this can be done by extracting the public key information from the certificate and then finding a RSA private key with matching public key information. For ECC, it’s a mess because there’s nothing linking the public key to the private key other than the seldom used, and optional, CKA_PUBLIC_KEY_INFO. Please include enough information in the private key object for an application to find it with only the public key.
  4. I’m probably in the minority, but I prefer pkcs11_pq_sig_verify_multi_1’s approach.

 

Sincerely,

Jonathan



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]