Alternative Certificate Formats for the Public-Key Infrastructure Using X.509 (PKIX) Certificate Management Protocols
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
(Russ Housley) Yes
(Steven Bellovin) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection
The security considerations section is inadequate. The phrase "this entire memo is about security" should be banned... Does use of this format introduce any new risks? Quite possibly -- the situation seems analogous to downgrade attacks. Are there other risks?
(Margaret Cullen) No Objection
(Ted Hardie) No Objection
(Scott Hollenbeck) No Objection
Comment (2004-03-17 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
I really think the Security Considerations section of this document could be better written to address the topics described in RFC 3552/BCP 72, even if only to say that there are no issues with authentication, authorization, privacy, etc.
(Bert Wijnen) No Record
Comment (2004-04-02 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
Violates the use of fqdns "Alice <firstname.lastname@example.org>" Should probably be email@example.com ?? There are multiple of those