W3C

Disposition of comments for the XML Security Working Group

paged view

In the table below, red is in the WG decision column indicates that the Working Group didn't agree with the comment, green indicates that a it agreed with it, and yellow reflects an in-between situation.

In the "Commentor reply" column, red indicates the commenter objected to the WG resolution, green indicates approval, and yellow means the commenter didn't respond to the request for feedback.

CommentorCommentWorking Group decisionCommentor reply
LC-2368 Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> (archived comment)
ISSUE-188: Agreement referenced in XML Signature 1.1 but definition not clear [Sig11 (XML Signature 1.1)]

http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/188

Raised by: Frederick Hirsch
On product: Sig11 (XML Signature 1.1)

Issue: xenc:Agreement referenced by XML Signature 1.1 does not appear to be defined.

XML Signature 1.1 section 4.5.8, http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-keyconvenance


states:
"The <xenc:EncryptedKey> and <xenc:Agreement> elements defined in [XMLENC-CORE1] as children of ds:KeyInfo can be used to convey in-band key agreement information, or encrypted key material."

xenc:Agreement does not appear in XML Encryption 1.1 or in the XML Encryption schema?

also referenced in section 4.5, KeyInfo schema.
http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core-11/Overview.htm#sec-KeyInfo

Proposal:

Change references from xenc:Agreement to enc:DerivedKey in XML Signature 1.1
Change xenc:Agreement changed to enc:DerivedKey in XML Signature 1.1 as proposed in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Mar/0001.html

The WG adopted the following resolution:

RESOLUTION: Accept change to XML Signature 1.1 for ISSUE-188 as distributed by Magnus in message 1 of March 2010.

Minuted at http://www.w3.org/2010/03/02-xmlsec-minutes.html#item07
yes
LC-2376 MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> (archived comment)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Mar/0052.html

Which is correct?

http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#sha384 (in XML Signature 1.1)
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384 (in XML Encryption 1.1)

Do they refer to different algorithms?

---
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Mar/0029.html

Also,

In 6.1, the URI is

http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384

In 6.2.3, the URI is

http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha384

Which is correct? Or, are they different?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Mar/0074.html

RESOLUTION: use http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384 for backward compatibility

Minutes: http://www.w3.org/2010/03/09-xmlsec-minutes.html#item03
yes
LC-2371 Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu> (archived comment)
During the Requirements Workshop that led to the 1.1 effort, some flaws in
the schema and their impact on the ds:RetrievalMethod element were
discussed. With the inability to change the schema, an alternative approach
had to be developed to fix the problems with RetrievalMethod and the
assumption had been that the solution would require changes coming in XML
Signature 2.0.

After examining the problem and working up a solution, it turns out to be
compatible with XML Signature 1.1 as a KeyInfo child element extension, and
I believe it should be incorporated into 1.1 before final approval. The
addition is small, and low risk.

I propose the following additional section to be added as 4.5.10, and the
additional schema content added to the 1.1 extension schema. (We may wish to
adjust the warning text in section 4.5.3 about the use of RetrievalMethod to
recommend the use of KeyInfoReference in its place, but this is optional.)

------
The KeyInfoReference Element

A KeyInfoReference element within KeyInfo is used to convey a reference to a
KeyInfo element at another location in the same or different document. For
example, several signatures in a document might use a key verified by an
X.509v3 certificate chain appearing once in the document or remotely outside
the document; each signature's KeyInfo can reference this chain using a
single KeyInfoReference element instead of including the entire chain with a
sequence of X509Certificate elements repeated in multiple places.

KeyInfoReference uses the same syntax and dereferencing behavior as
Reference's URI (section 4.4.3.1) and the Reference Processing Model
(section 4.4.3.2) except that there are no child elements and the presence
of the URI attribute is mandatory.

The result of dereferencing a KeyInfoReference MUST be a KeyInfo element, or
an XML document with a KeyInfo element as the root.

Note: The KeyInfoReference element is a desirable alternative to the use of
RetrievalMethod when the data being referred to is a KeyInfo element and the
use of RetrievalMethod would require one or more Transform child elements,
which introduce security risk and implementation challenges.

Schema Definition

<!-- targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/2009/xmldsig11#" -->

<element name="KeyInfoReference" type="dsig11:KeyInfoReferenceType"/>
<complexType name="KeyInfoReferenceType">
<attribute name="URI" type="anyURI" use="required"/>
<attribute name="Id" type="ID" use="optional"/>
</complexType>
RESOLUTION: WG agrees to KeyInfoReference proposal from Scott, removing Type, allowing continued use of RetrievalMethod for other purposes, and referencing Reference for URI processing

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/09-xmlsec-minutes.html#item06

also to be clear for 1.1:

RESOLUTION: Accept proposed Last Call change in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Feb/0019.html

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/16-xmlsec-minutes.html#item07
yes
LC-2390 Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu> (archived comment)
Just reviewing the schema and noted there's a redundancy:

<simpleType name="ECPointType">
<restriction base="ds:CryptoBinary"/>
</simpleType>

Other places in the EC key syntax schema just use CryptoBinary directly, so
I'd suggest removing that type definition and
s/dsig11:ECPointType/ds:CryptoBinary for consistency.

This shouldn't affect any implementations at this point.
RESOLUTION: No change needed for LC-2390, Schema Redundancy last call issue yes
LC-2391 Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu> (archived comment)
Small nit in section 4.5.2.3, ECKeyValue Element, there's a reference to
identifying a named curve with a "URN" attribute, should be "URI" I believe.

There also seem to be issues in that section and surrounding text that
aren't properly styling element names. That may need review throughout the
text, but that's just editorial.
Attribute was changed to URI in section 4.5.2.3 as suggested, before CR. yes
LC-2424 Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu> (archived comment)
Due to the ongoing problems with the X509IssuerSerial element, I would ask
that a new X509Data alternative for representing certificates uniquely by
hash be added to the 1.1 schema and specification, per the suggested changes
here:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xmlsec/2010Sep/0052.html
RESOLUTION: group accepts scantor's proposal, to change both 1.1 and 2.0 specifications
http://www.w3.org/2010/09/28-xmlsec-minutes.html#item05

Updated XML SIgnature 1.1 draft, schema and RELAX NG Schema.
yes

Developed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org).
$Id: doc.php,v 1.36 2014-02-19 08:10:56 dom Exp $
Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to w3t-sys.org