Subject: RE: CMS Advanced Electronic Signatures (CAdES)

From: "Stefan Santesson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 17:46:46 +0100

It may matter for the motivation of individuals to take part in a review
process.

Stefan Santesson
Program Manager, Standards Liaison
Windows Security

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]
> On Behalf Of Turner, Sean P.
> Sent: den 18 juli 2005 09:24
> To: Stefan Santesson; 'S-MIME / IETF'
> Cc: 'pkix'
> Subject: RE: CMS Advanced Electronic Signatures (CAdES)
> 
> 
> It's intended to be informational so I'm not sure how relevant how
> deployed
> it is an issue.
> 
> spt
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Santesson [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 12:10 PM
> To: [email-masked]; S-MIME / IETF
> Cc: pkix
> Subject: RE: CMS Advanced Electronic Signatures (CAdES)
> 
> A question that is relevant to this is any information on to what
extent
> this standard is actually deployed.
> 
> Stefan Santesson
> Program Manager, Standards Liaison
> Windows Security
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > On Behalf Of Turner, Sean P.
> > Sent: den 18 juli 2005 05:39
> > To: 'S-MIME / IETF'
> > Cc: 'pkix'
> > Subject: RE: CMS Advanced Electronic Signatures (CAdES)
> >
> >
> > The question at hand is someone in the working group willing to
review
> > this ID?
> >
> > spt
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > On
> > Behalf Of Denis Pinkas
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 9:20 AM
> > To: S-MIME / IETF
> > Cc: pkix
> > Subject: CMS Advanced Electronic Signatures (CAdES)
> >
> >
> > To the S-MIME list,
> >
> >
> > Copy: the PKIX list.
> >
> > RFC 3126 has been issued in September 2001 and its title is:
> >
> > "Electronic Signature Format for long term electronic signatures"
> >
> > The contents of this Informational RFC is technically equivalent to
> ETSI
> > TS
> > 101 733 V.1.2.2.
> >
> > In the mean time, ETSI TC ESI has revised this Technical Standard
(TS)
> and
> > is going to publish a new version of it with a new title :
> >
> > CMS Advanced Electronic Signatures (CAdES), in order to be the
> "brother"
> > of
> > XML Advanced Electronic Signatures (XAdES), published as ETSI TS 101
> 903.
> >
> > In order to make this document widely available, ETSI has produced
an
> > equivalent of the revised TS using the format of a RFC.
> >
> > This document is temporarily available (by a kind hosting from Paul
> > Offman)
> > from:
> >
> > <http://www.imc.org/ietf-smime/TEMP-draft-pinkas-smime-cades-00.txt>
> >
> > until is is officially posted in the IETF repository.
> >
> > The major changes are mentioned section  J :
> >
> >    "The title of the document has changed to be aligned with the
title
> >    of XAdES, the vocabulary used within the present document has
been
> >    aligned with the vocabulary used in XAdES,
> >
> >    In the previous version of TS 101 733 (i.e. version 1.5.1)
> >    sigPolicyHash was mandatory.  Implementations requiring to be
> >    backward compatible with version 1.5.1 and previous versions
> >    of the current document MUST include SigPolicyHash.
> >
> >    The OIDs from the ASN.1 modules have changed for the following
> >    reasons:
> >
> >     - the OIDs of the ASN.1 modules of RFC 2560 and RFC 3161 have
been
> >       included.
> >
> >     - since RFC 2459 and RFC 3369 has been obsoleted by RFC 3280 and
> >       RFC 3852 respectively, there was the need to refer to the OIDs
> >       of the ASN.1 modules of RFC 3280 and RFC 3852, instead of the
> >       OIDs of the ASN.1 modules of RFC 2459 and RFC 3369.
> >
> >     - the other change is related to the field sigPolicyHash from
> >       SignaturePolicyId (see clause 5.8.1). That field was mandatory
> >       and is now optional."
> >
> > It is proposed to progress this document within the S-MIME WG as an
> > Informational Standard.
> >
> > Denis
> >
> >
> >
> 
>