Elliptic Curve Private Key Structure
draft-turner-ecprivatekey-04
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2012-08-22
|
04 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the Yes position for Russ Housley |
2010-02-17
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
2010-02-16
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress |
2010-02-16
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2010-02-16
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2010-02-16
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2010-02-16
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2010-02-05
|
04 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2010-02-04 |
2010-02-04
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-turner-ecprivatekey-04.txt |
2010-02-04
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Cindy Morgan |
2010-02-04
|
04 | Ralph Droms | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ralph Droms |
2010-02-04
|
04 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
2010-02-04
|
04 | Adrian Farrel | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Adrian Farrel |
2010-02-03
|
04 | Ross Callon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ross Callon |
2010-02-03
|
04 | Ron Bonica | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ron Bonica |
2010-02-03
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-turner-ecprivatekey-03.txt |
2010-02-03
|
04 | Robert Sparks | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Robert Sparks |
2010-02-02
|
04 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings |
2010-01-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Russ Housley has been changed to Yes from No Objection by Russ Housley |
2010-01-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Russ Housley has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Russ Housley |
2010-01-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot comment] The end of Section 1 says: > > When the public key is included, it is present in the ECPrivateKey … [Ballot comment] The end of Section 1 says: > > When the public key is included, it is present in the ECPrivateKey > publicKey field not in the PKCS#8 publicKey field. > It would be more clear to say: > > There are two possible locations to carry a public key. When one is > included, the publicKey field in the ECPrivateKey is used. The > publicKey field in PKCS#8 is not used. In section 4, the document says: > > Local storage of an unencrypted ECPrivateKey object is out of scope > of this document. However, one popular format uses the .pem file > extension. > PEM files support encrypted storage too. In section 5, the document says: > > Protection of the private-key information is vital to public-key > cryptography. Disclosure of the private-key material to another > entity can lead to masquerades. The encryption algorithm used in the > encryption process must be as 'strong' as the key it is protecting. > This is incomplete. The consequences of disclosure depends on the purpose of the private key. If a private key is used for signature, then the disclosure allows unauthorizes signing. If a private key is used for key management, then disclosure allows unauthorized parties to acess the managed keying material. |
2010-01-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot discuss] The ASN.1 module in Appendix A needs a module identifier. |
2010-01-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Russ Housley |
2010-01-27
|
04 | Tim Polk | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2010-02-04 by Tim Polk |
2010-01-14
|
04 | Tim Polk | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Tim Polk |
2010-01-14
|
04 | Tim Polk | Ballot has been issued by Tim Polk |
2010-01-14
|
04 | Tim Polk | Created "Approve" ballot |
2010-01-14
|
04 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system |
2010-01-04
|
04 | Amanda Baber | IANA comments: As described in the IANA Considerations section, we understand this document to have NO IANA Actions. |
2009-12-11
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Sandra Murphy |
2009-12-11
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Sandra Murphy |
2009-12-10
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
2009-12-10
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
2009-12-10
|
04 | Tim Polk | State Changes to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested by Tim Polk |
2009-12-10
|
04 | Tim Polk | Last Call was requested by Tim Polk |
2009-12-10
|
04 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2009-12-10
|
04 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2009-12-10
|
04 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2009-12-10
|
04 | Russ Housley | 1.a - Carl Wallace is the Shepherd. He's personally reviewed the I-D and personally knows it's ready for IESG publication. 1.b - The document has … 1.a - Carl Wallace is the Shepherd. He's personally reviewed the I-D and personally knows it's ready for IESG publication. 1.b - The document has been reviewed by IETF attendees. There are no concerns about depth or breadth of the reviews. 1.c - There is no need for wider review. 1.d - There are no specific concerns that the AD and/or IESG should be aware of. 1.e - The consensus is solid as a rock. 1.f - There has been no threat of an appeal. 1.g - The Shepherd has personally verified that the document satisfies all I-D nits. 1.h - The document splits it references. 1.i - The document has an IANA consideration and it is consistent with the main body (there are no IANA considerations). 1.j - The Shepherd has personally compiled the ASN.1 modules. Technical Summary This document specifies the syntax and semantics for Elliptic Curve (EC) private key information. This syntax and semantics defined therein are based on a similar syntax and semantics defined in Standards for Efficient Cryptography Group (SECG). It is profiled for the IETF as the ECPublicKey structure from SECG is profiled for the IETF in RFC 5480. Working Group Summary The publication announcement for this I-D was forwarded to the PKIX WG for comment. Reviews resulted in 3 versions. The 1st revision replaced the conversion routine with an existing routine from RFC 3447 (reuse is better than reinventing), added an acknowledgments section, and updated a reference for Base64 encodings. The 2nd revision added an other considerations section to discuss transfer and local storage encoding and required the presence of parameters. Document Quality This text is short (4 pages) and so is the ASN.1 (5 lines). It is based on the SECG document whose text and ASN.1 has been stable for many years. OpenSSL supports the structure as defined in this document. Personnel Carl Wallace is the document Shepherd. Tim Polk is the responsible AD. |
2009-12-10
|
04 | Russ Housley | Draft Added by Russ Housley in state Publication Requested |
2009-12-04
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-turner-ecprivatekey-02.txt |
2009-11-19
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-turner-ecprivatekey-01.txt |
2009-10-19
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-turner-ecprivatekey-00.txt |