> On Oct 21, 2020, at 10:58 AM, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker > <[email protected]> wrote: > > x5t: This header parameter provides the ability to identify an X.509 > certificate by a hash value. The attribute is an array of two > > I suggest using the word "thumbprint" somewhere to motivate the 't' in > "x5t”.
Using “thumbprint” makes sense to me, though it was changed from thumbprint to fingerprint in March <https://github.com/cose-wg/X509/commit/32c2bf2b2411250f6d9232b43ae0813ac9d88a44>. Is it the common understanding that this “x5t” identifies the end-entity cert like subjectKeyIdentifier does for CMS <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5652#section-5.3>? I can’t imagine what else it would identify, but it seems saying this explicitly would be helpful. CMS certainly is explicit and detailed on this. > > Also, we may want to make a pass to check for consistent usage of > "attribute", "parameter", etc. -- I think this is the first time we say > "the attribute is”. I believe the correct term is “header parameter”. This was settled on for draft-ietf-cose-rfc8152bis-struct and Jim made a number of changes to cose-x509 to use that term back in March (same PR as referenced above). However, “attribute” is still used a lot and probably all those uses should be “header parameter”. LL
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
