-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Brian

>> As far as X.509 certificates go, this point is correct, but using
>> IP addresses in subjectAltName (lower case s) is a really bad idea anyway.
>> We recommend against this in section 5.3.5 of 
>> draft-carpenter-renum-needs-work-03
>> (which is under AD review for Informational status).

Yes. I agree. I did have doubts about
focusing on subjectAltName as a common example,
but I could not come up with a better one right now.
I did think the verification problem that Heikki mentioned
is important and can happen in other protocols so I might
fix the wording to focus on the problem.

Regards,
Seiichi


Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2009-08-27 15:55, Seiichi Kawamura wrote:
> Hi Heikki
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to review the document,
> and your point is something that I think is worth
> mentioning in the draft. How about we add a sub-section
> like this
> 
> 3.2.5 verification and validiation
> 
> [RFC 5280] section 4.2.1.6 states that X.509 certificates may
> contain IPv6 addresses in the SubjectAltName field.
> When these fields are verified against actual connection status, if
> verification was done with a simple text comparison, the certificate
> may be mistakenly shown as being invalid. Similar problems can occur
> in any protocol that embeds IPv6 addresses which have to be verified
> or validated.
> 
> I admit word smithing needs to be done, but does this seem reasonable?
> 
>> As far as X.509 certificates go, this point is correct, but using
>> IP addresses in subjectAltName (lower case s) is a really bad idea anyway.
>> We recommend against this in section 5.3.5 of 
>> draft-carpenter-renum-needs-work-03
>> (which is under AD review for Informational status).
> 
>>      Brian
>>>> Thanks for documenting these issues!
> and thank you for your comments.
> 
> Regards,
> Seiichi
> 
> 
> Heikki Vatiainen wrote:
>>>> In case examples of problems with address presentation are useful, here
>>>> is one more.
>>>>
>>>> RFC 5280 "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and
>>>> Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile" section 4.2.1.6. "Subject
>>>> Alternative Name" says that IPv6 addresses can be contained in
>>>> subjectAltName. No news there.
>>>>
>>>> When actually using a certificate that has an IPv6 address the following
>>>> behaviour was seen with various SSL related components:
>>>>
>>>> Perl library Net::SSLeay returns the IPv6 subjectAltName in this format:
>>>> fdf1:a315:9433:27:0:0:0:27
>>>>
>>>> Perl Socket6 library contains inet_ntop that returns address in this
>>>> format: fdf1:a315:9433:27::27
>>>>
>>>> OpenSSL utility that dumps the certificate in text format shows the
>>>> address like this: FDF1:A315:9433:27:0:0:0:27
>>>>
>>>> Just recently I was debugging a perl program that had a problem with
>>>> certificate verification. Certificate verification failed when the
>>>> certificate presented by peer had subjectAltName with IPv6 address
>>>> fdf1:a315:9433:27:0:0:0:27 and this did not match the address where the
>>>> connection came from: fdf1:a315:9433:27::27.
>>>>
>>>> Same address but different presentation was the cause here too since the
>>>> comparison was done using text strings.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for documenting these issues!
>>>>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>

- --
================================================
NEC BIGLOBE Ltd.
   Seiichi Kawamura <[email protected]>
   +81 3 3798 6085  (FAX: +81 3 3798 6029)
   +81 90 1547 4791 (mobile)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)

iEYEARECAAYFAkqWEBsACgkQcrhTYfxyMkJYEwCfWoAsHGkE5h6HHEQEDpUJWTcb
I4IAn1qYK6FwK9YmaD1y1NLVglPxYQPO
=PioL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to