#83: CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA

Comment (by [email protected]):

 The revised draft doesn't mention that this explicitly precludes RSASSA-
 PSS.  Do we want that stated explicitly?

 Also, we probably want to add more than one signature over a single
 timestamp to the list of things that a monitor or auditor should look for
 as evidence of log malfeasance (though i'm not sure whether this list
 belongs in 6962-bis or elsewhere.

-- 
-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email protected]  |       Owner:  [email protected]
     Type:  defect                 |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                  |   Milestone:  review
Component:  rfc6962-bis            |     Version:
 Severity:  -                      |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                         |
-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/83#comment:14>
trans <https://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

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

Reply via email to