On Mon, Feb 23, 2004, Lev Walkin wrote:

> Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 23, 2004, Chris Brook wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Is there any support in crypto->x509(v3) for certificate policy
> >>processing/checking as described in X.509 or PKIX?  I had a quick look
> >>through the code but did not see anything?  Or is it planned since it is
> >>required for some of the PKI compliance tests?
> >>This gets pretty complex with pathLengthConstraints, Name Constraints, 
> >>User
> >>and Authority Constrained policies.  Perhaps someone is planning a
> >>contribution.
> >
> >
> >Not that I know of. I was asked about the possibility of adding support by
> >someone last year. After lots of discussions nothing happened. I haven't
> >heard anything more for a couple of months.
> >
> >I could resurrect it if there was sufficient interest.
> 
> Are we talking about proper checking of ASN.1 subtype constraints, or of
> something more higher level?
> 

No its a different thing entirely. The ASN1 subtype constraints aren't that
essential for this and in some cases strict enforcement is a bad idea.

In fact the ASN1 code for encoding and decoding almost all the relevant
extensions has been in OpenSSL for some time. CertificatePolicies has been
there for some years, I know because I wrote it and still have nightmares.

A few very complex things like ORAddress aren't in there but I've never seen
any examples of its use.

However I digress. What we are talking about here is processing things like
CertificatePolicies in the OpenSSL certificate chain verify code something
which it doesn't currently do. 

Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
Funding needed! Details on homepage.
Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to