Hi Ben and dev-security-policy group,

Consorci AOC supports banning SHA-1 across the board.

We no longer support SHA-1 signatures for services related to CAs trusted by 
Mozilla, in our situation OCSP and CRL, and we have met the deadline to change 
in February 2022.

We use SHA-1 for other purposes such as accepting SHA-1 hashes in CSRs, for the 
issuerKeyHash and issuerNameHash in OCSP requests, and in computing and 
validating subjectkeyidentifer and issuerkeyidentifier values.

Thank you,

_



_
_
Francesc Ferrer i Grevolosa
Àrea de Tecnologia
Consorci Administració Oberta de Catalunya
Tànger, 98 (planta baixa) 08018 Barcelona
tel: 93 272 40 00
www.aoc.cat<http://www.aoc.cat/> - @consorciaoc
"Impulsem la transformació digital de les Administracions Catalanes, per 
promoure Governs Àgils, Lògics i Col·laboratius "

Aquest correu electrònic, així com qualsevol fitxer annex, conté informació 
classificada. Queda prohibida la seva divulgació, còpia o distribució a 
persones diferents del seu destinatari exclusiu sense autorització prèvia per 
escrit del Consorci Administració Oberta de Catalunya. Si vostè ha rebut aquest 
correu electrònic per error, si us plau notifiqui-ho immediatament al remitent 
reenviant-lo.


De: [email protected] <[email protected]> En nombre 
de Ben Wilson
Enviado el: divendres, 21 de gener de 2022 20:55
Para: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Asunto: Policy 2.8: MRSP Issue #178: Sunset SHA1

All,

This email launches a new discussion related to sunsetting the future use of 
SHA1 in the Mozilla Root Store Policy 
(MRSP)<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/security-group/certs/policy/>.

It is related to GitHub Issue 
#178<https://github.com/mozilla/pkipolicy/issues/178> (as well as Issue 
#201<https://github.com/mozilla/pkipolicy/issues/201>).

SHA1 is still allowed to be used in signing SMIME certificates, Authority 
Revocation Lists (ARLs), and CRLs, and OCSP responses (but see CABF Ballot 
<https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/2022-January/003090.html>
SC53: Sunset for SHA-1 OCSP 
Signing<https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/2022-January/003090.html>).
Can the future use of SHA1 signing be eliminated from the MRSP altogether, and 
if so, on what timeframes?

Currently, SHA1 is mentioned in the MRSP as follows:
-----------
Section 5.1.1 
RSA<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/security-group/certs/policy/#511-rsa>

When a root or intermediate certificate's RSA key is used to produce a 
signature, only the following algorithms may be used, and with the following 
encoding requirements:

  *   RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 with SHA-1.

The encoded AlgorithmIdentifier MUST match the following hex-encoded bytes: 
300d06092a864886f70d0101050500.

See section 5.1.3 for further restrictions on the use of SHA-1.

Section 5.1.3 
SHA-1<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/security-group/certs/policy/#513-sha-1>

CAs MAY sign SHA-1 hashes over end-entity certificates which chain up to roots 
in Mozilla's program only if all the following are true:

  1.  The end-entity certificate:

     *   is not within the scope of the Baseline Requirements;
     *   contains an EKU extension which does not contain either of the 
id-kp-serverAuth or anyExtendedKeyUsage key purposes;
     *   has at least 64 bits of entropy from a CSPRNG in the serial number.

  1.  The issuing certificate:

     *   contains an EKU extension which does not contain either of the 
id-kp-serverAuth or anyExtendedKeyUsage key purposes;
     *   has a pathlen:0 constraint.

Point 2 does not apply if the certificate is an OCSP signing certificate 
manually issued directly from a root.

CAs MAY sign SHA-1 hashes over intermediate certificates which chain up to 
roots in Mozilla's program only if the certificate to be signed is a duplicate 
of an existing SHA-1 intermediate certificate with the only changes being all 
of:

  *   a new key (of the same size);
  *   a new serial number (of the same length);
  *   the addition of an EKU and/or a pathlen constraint to meet the 
requirements outlined above.

CAs MAY sign SHA-1 hashes over OCSP responses only if the signing certificate 
contains an EKU extension which contains only the id-kp-ocspSigning EKU.

CAs MAY sign SHA-1 hashes over CRLs for roots and intermediates only if they 
have issued SHA-1 certificates.

CAs MUST NOT sign SHA-1 hashes over other data, including CT pre-certificates.

-----------

I am thinking that we could amend MSRP sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.3 to have sunset 
dates and to also say something to the effect that:

"CAs MUST NOT sign SHA-1 hashes over any data."

Thoughts?

Thanks,

Ben





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtaZ69aUkmG9m978YTjeiDsRtznTmL0-%2B_6eP%2BfmiDgpSGQ%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtaZ69aUkmG9m978YTjeiDsRtznTmL0-%2B_6eP%2BfmiDgpSGQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected]" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/PA4PR08MB7481B0EBA0065C07C3EB64F9BD0C9%40PA4PR08MB7481.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com.

Reply via email to