Re: [dss-x] X.509 profile & SCVP

[Stefan Hagen <stefan@dilettant.eu>]

Thank you Andreas for providing the document.

Yes, I think contacting the authors of RFC 5055 is a worthwhile
undertaking.

But, maybe first read on the potential IPR claims related to that
document :-)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/589/ from CoreStreet updates
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/563/ ibid all from 2005
(the usual patent pending yes damocles sword ?)

The patents listed are documented at:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5717758A/en
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5717757A/en
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5666416A/en


All to me very broad ... anyway, I am on vacation, so hope this helps.

All the best,
Stefan.

Am 26.07.18 um 12:30 schrieb Andreas Kuehne:
> Hi colleagues,
>
>
> there is the client request to support the validation of X.509
> certificates by DSS-X. Technically this isn't a big deal as the
> core interface will remain unchanged (treating the certificate as an
> enveloped signature). The implementor's side should be an easy job, too.
> As certificate validation is a major part of the signature validation. I
> drafted a profile (see attached) just by using the existing elements of
> the core. Comments welcome!
>
> This result has a big overlap with the SCVP (Serverside Certificate
> Validation Protocol, RFC 5055) and I don't like to reinvent existing
> wheels. But with DSS-X's multi-syntax binding the X.509 profile does
> offer real added value compared to ASN.1-only SCVP. So I thought about
> addressing the SCVP authors and ask for their view and hopefully some
> contribution. Would this make sense?
>
>
> Greetings,
>
>
> Andreas
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php


--
Stefan Hagen
read://shagen.de
talk: eventually