On 06/01/2015 03:19 PM, Ben Laurie wrote:
> On 29 May 2015 at 14:51, Ondrej Mikle <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> what should be the LogEntryType for SCTs in case of SCTs sent in TLS
>> extension? I think it's missing in section 3.4.1 in 6962-bis (sections
>> 3.4.2.1 and 3.4.2.2 specify it). By looking at the reference CT client
>> it seems that it is expected to be "x509_entry" (in
>> CertSubmissionHandler::X509ChainToEntry).
> 
> Not sure there's any need to require particular types for SCTs. In
> practice, an SCT included in an X509v3 extension has to be a
> precertificate SCT, of course. But in other contexts it could be
> either type - though it would obviously be expected that for OCSP and
> TLS extensions it would be an x509_entry, there's no reason I can see
> to force this choice.

Unless it's explicitly specified, the code has to try both variants
(precert_entry and x509_entry) to see which one would match the
signature. At least I thought that was the reason LogEntryType was
explicitly specified for OCSP extension and certificate extension in
6962-bis (and was wondering why explicit LogEntryType was missing in for
TLS extension).

Ondrej

_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans

Reply via email to