On 07/08/10 15:22, [email protected] wrote:
Your other question: why not have a separate sigalg and hashalg?
According to most other conventions, the two are kept together in one
string.

OpenSSL uses this approach:

        http://www.openssl.org/docs/apps/ciphers.html

Sendmail uses a similar approach, but spells out the hash bits
explicitly in the header:

        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)

Under the covers, protocols like X.509 which use OID's for codepoints typically use a single OID to identify a (pk alg, hash alg) pair; there may not be an OID defined for all possible combinations of hashes and signature algorithms. Some combinations of (pk alg, hash alg) might not even be sensible -- for instance, it makes no sense to use a hash function with an output too big to be directly signed by the public key algorithm.

TLS and SSL specifically use a "cipher suite" approach where a single identifier picks a complete set of algorithms and algorithm size parameters.





_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to