[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ietf-tls
Subject:    Re: [TLS] Possible TLS 1.3 erratum
From:       Hubert Kario <hkario () redhat ! com>
Date:       2021-07-20 19:37:32
Message-ID: 818eb8d3-7de7-4d54-8734-10855a4ceeba () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday, 20 July 2021 16:18:38 CEST, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> Hubert Kario <hkario@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> I suggest you go back to the RFCs and check exactly what is 
>> needed for proper
>> handling of RSA-PSS Subject Public Key type in X.509. 
>> Specifically when the
>> "parameters" field is present.
>
> Looking at the code I'm using, it's four lines of extra code for PSS when
> reading sigs and four lines extra when writing (OK, technically seven if you
> include the "if" statement and curly braces lines).

And that code will reject a SHA-512 signature if it was made by a 
certificate
with hash algorithm of SHA-256?
What about MGF? Salt length?

Will it reject PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures made with such a key?

It's one thing to be able to read a certificate with those parameters,
it's completely different to actually implement the standard.
-- 
Regards,
Hubert Kario
Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team
Web: www.cz.redhat.com
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]