Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Errata] [Info page]

EXPERIMENTAL
Errata Exist
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         J. SchaadRequest for Comments: 6210                       Soaring Hawk ConsultingCategory: Experimental                                        April 2011ISSN: 2070-1721Experiment: Hash Functions with Parametersin the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) and S/MIMEAbstract   New hash algorithms are being developed that may include parameters.   Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) has not currently defined any hash   algorithms with parameters, but anecdotal evidence suggests that   defining one could cause major problems.  This document defines just   such an algorithm and describes how to use it so that experiments can   be run to find out how bad including hash parameters will be.Status of This Memo   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is   published for examination, experimental implementation, and   evaluation.   This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet   community.  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering   Task Force (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF   community.  It has received public review and has been approved for   publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not   all documents approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of   Internet Standard; seeSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6210.Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 1]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of   publication of this document.  Please review these documents   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as   described in the Simplified BSD License.Table of Contents1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31.1.  Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52.  XOR-MD5 Digest Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53.  ASN.1 Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64.  CMS ASN.1 Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65.  MIME Handling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Appendix A.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9A.1.  Encapsulated Signed Data Example . . . . . . . . . . . . .9A.2.  Multipart Signed Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10A.3.  Authenticated Data Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Appendix B.  2008 ASN.1 Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 2]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 20111.  Introduction   At the present time, all hash algorithms that are used in   Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) implementations are defined as   having no parameters.  Anecdotal evidence suggests that if a hash   algorithm is defined that does require the presence of parameters,   there may be extensive problems.  This document presents the details   needed to run an experiment so that the community can find out just   how bad the situation really is and, if needed, either make drastic   changes in implementations or make sure that any hash algorithms   chosen do not have parameters.   In CMS data structures, hash algorithms currently exist in the   following locations:   o  SignerInfo.digestAlgorithm - holds the digest algorithm used to      compute the hash value over the content.   o  DigestedData.digestAlgorithm - holds the digest algorithm used to      compute the hash value over the content.   o  AuthenticatedData.digestAlgorithm - holds the digest algorithm      used to compute the hash value over the content.   o  SignedData.digestAlgorithms - an optional location to hold the set      of digest algorithms used in computing the hash value over the      content.   o  multipart/signed micalg - holds a textual indicator of the hash      algorithm for multipart signed MIME messages.   The first three locations hold the identification of a single hash,   and would hold the parameters for that hash.  It's mandatory to fill   these fields.   The ASN.1 structures defined for the DigestedData and   AuthenticatedData types place the digest algorithm field before the   encapsulated data field.  This means that the hash algorithm   (including the parameters) is fully defined, and therfore can be   instantiated, before the hash function would start hashing the   encapsulated data.   In the ASN.1 defined for the SignedData type, the value of   SignerInfo.digestAlgorithm is not seen until the content has been   processed.  This is the reason for the existence of the   SignedData.digestAlgorithms field, so that the set of all digest   algorithms used can be seen prior to the content being processed.  It   is not currently mandatory to fill in this field, and the signatureSchaad                        Experimental                      [Page 3]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011   validation process is supposed to succeed even if this field is   absent.  (RFC 5652 says signature validation MAY fail if the digest   algorithm is absent.)   For the case of detached content, the ASN.1 structures need to be   processed before processing the detached content in order to obtain   the parameters of the hash function.  The MIME multipart/signature   content type attempts to avoid this problem by defining a micalg   field that contains the set of hash algorithms (with parameters) so   that the hash functions can be set up prior to processing the   content.   When processing multipart/signed messages, two paths exists:   1.  Process the message content before the ASN.1.  The steps involved       are:       *  Get a set of hash functions by looking at the micalg parameter          and potentially add a set of generic algorithms.       *  Create a hasher for each of those algorithms.       *  Hash the message content (the first part of the multipart).       *  Process the ASN.1 and have a potential failure point if a hash          algorithm is required but was not computed.   2.  Process the message content after the ASN.1.  The steps involved       are:       *  Save the message content for later processing.       *  Parse the ASN.1 and build a list of hash functions based on          its content.       *  Create a hasher for each of those algorithms.       *  Hash the saved message content.       *  Perform the signature validation.   The first path allows for single-pass processing, but has the   potential that a fallback path needs to be added in some cases.  The   second path does not need a fallback path, but does not allow for   single-pass processing.Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 4]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011   The fallback path above may also be needed for the encapsulated   content case.  Since it is optional to place hash algorithms in the   SignedData.digestAlgorithms field, the content will be completely   parsed before the set of hash algorithms used in the various   SignerInfo structures are determined.  It may be that an update to   CMS is required to make population of the SignedData.digestAlgorithms   field mandatory, in the event that a parameterized hash algorithm is   adopted.   In this document, a new hash function is created that is based on the   XOR operator and on MD5.  MD5 was deliberately used as the basis of   this digest algorithm since it is known to be insecure, and I do not   want to make any statements that the hash algorithm designed here is   in any way secure.  This hash function MUST NOT be released as   shipping code, it is designed only for use in experimentation.  An   example of a parameterized hash algorithm that might be standardized   is a scheme developed by Shai Halevi and Hugo Krawczyk [RANDOM-HASH].1.1.  Notation   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].2.  XOR-MD5 Digest Algorithm   The XOR-MD5 digest algorithm has been designed to use two existing   operators, XOR and the MD5 hash algorithm [MD5].  The hash algorithm   works as follows:   1.  A random XOR string consisting of exactly 64 bytes is created.   2.  The input content is broken up into 64-byte blocks.  The last       block may be less that 64 bytes.   3.  Each block is XOR-ed with the random string.  The last block uses       the same number of bits from the random string as it contains.   4.  The resulting string is run through the MD5 hash function.   The length of the XOR string was designed to match the barrel size of   the MD5 hash function.Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 5]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 20113.  ASN.1 Encoding   The following ASN.1 is used to define the algorithm:   mda-xor-md5-EXPERIMENT DIGEST-ALGORITHM ::= {      IDENTIFIER id-alg-MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT      PARAMS TYPE MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT ARE required   }   id-alg-MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= {      iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549)      pkcs(1) pkcs-9(9) smime(16) id-alg(3) 13   }   MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT ::= OCTET STRING (SIZE(64))   The octet string holds the value of the random XOR string.4.  CMS ASN.1 Handling   The algorithm is added to the DigestAlgorithmSet in [CMS].   When this algorithm is used in a signed message, it is REQUIRED that   the algorithm be placed in the SignedData.digestAlgorithms sequence.   The algorithm MUST appear in the sequence at least once for each   unique set of parameters.  The algorithm SHOULD NOT appear multiple   times with the same set of parameters.5.  MIME Handling   This section defines the string that appears in the micalg parameter.   The algorithm is identified by the string xor-md5.  The parameters   for the algorithm are the hex-encoded Distinguished Encoding Rules   (DER) ASN.1 encoding.  The parameters and the identifier string are   separated by a colon.  One of the issues that needs to be addressed   is the fact that this will generate very long data values for   parameters.  These will be too long for many systems to deal with.   The issue of how to deal with this has been addressed in [RFC2231] by   creating a method to fragment values.  An example content-type string   that has been fragmented is:   Content-Type: multipart/signed;     protocol="application/pkcs7-signature";     micalg*0="sha1, xor-md5:04400102030405060708090a0b0c0d0e0f0011";     micalg*1="12131415161718191a1b1c1d1e1f102122232425262728292a2b";     micalg*2="2c2d2e2f203132333435363738";     micalg*3="393a3b3c3d3e3f30";  boundary=boundar42Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 6]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011   Arguments could be made that the string should be base64 encoded   rather than hex encoded.  The advantage is that the resulting   encoding is shorter.  This could be significant if there are a   substantial number of parameters and of a substantial size.  Even   with the above example, it was necessary to break the encoding across   multiple lines.  The downside would be the requirement that the   micalg parameter always be quoted.   It may be reasonable to require that whitespace be inserted only on   encoding boundaries, but it seems to be overly restrictive.6.  IANA Considerations   All identifiers are assigned out of the S/MIME OID arc.7.  Security Considerations   The algorithm XOR-MD5 is not designed for general-purpose use.  The   hash algorithm included here is designed for running this experiment   and nothing more.   This document makes no representation that XOR-MD5 is a secure digest   algorithm.  I believe that the algorithm is no more secure than MD5,   and I consider MD5 to be a broken hash algorithm for many purposes.   One known issue with the algorithm at present is the fact that the   XOR pattern is always 64 bytes long, even if the data is shorter.   This means that there is a section of the data than can be   manipulated without changing the hash.  In a real algorithm, this   should either be truncated or forced to a known value.8.  References8.1.  Normative References   [ASN.1-2008]  ITU-T, "ITU-T Recommendations X.680, X.681, X.682, and                 X.683", 2008.   [CMS]         Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)",RFC 5652, September 2009.   [MD5]         Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm",RFC 1321, April 1992.   [RFC2119]     Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate                 Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 7]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011   [RFC2231]     Freed, N. and K. Moore, "MIME Parameter Value and                 Encoded Word Extensions: Character Sets, Languages, and                 Continuations",RFC 2231, November 1997.   [SMIME-MSG]   Ramsdell, B. and S. Turner, "Secure/Multipurpose                 Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Message                 Specification",RFC 5751, January 2010.8.2.  Informative References   [CMS-ASN]     Hoffman, P. and J. Schaad, "New ASN.1 Modules for                 Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) and S/MIME",RFC 5911, June 2010.   [RANDOM-HASH] Halevi, S. and H. Krawczyk, "Strengthening Digital                 Signatures via Random Hashing", January 2007,                 <http://webee.technion.ac.il/~hugo/rhash/rhash.pdf>.   [RFC5912]     Hoffman, P. and J. Schaad, "New ASN.1 Modules for the                 Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509 (PKIX)",RFC 5912, June 2010.   [SMIME-EXAMPLES]                 Hoffman, P., "Examples of S/MIME Messages",RFC 4134,                 July 2005.Schaad                        Experimental                      [Page 8]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011Appendix A.  Examples   Provided here are a set of simple S/MIME messages [SMIME-MSG] that   are for testing.  The content used is the same as that found in   Section 2.1 of [SMIME-EXAMPLES].  The certificates and key pairs   found in [SMIME-EXAMPLES] are also used here.   The Perl script inAppendix A of [SMIME-EXAMPLES] can be used to   extract the binary examples from this file.  The MIME examples can be   extracted with a standard text editor.   Note: The examples presented here have not been independently   verified.  I was unable to use the Microsoft APIs because of the new   cryptographic hash algorithm.  However, for the purposes of this   experiment, I believe that the form of the messages, which can be   verified visually as correct, is more important than the question of   the message validating.A.1.  Encapsulated Signed Data Example   This section contains a detached signed data example.  The content   was hashed with the MD5-XOR algorithm defined in this document.  The   signature is performed using RSA with MD5.  The signature is wrapped   as an embedded signed mime message. MIME-Version: 1.0 To: BobRSA@example.com From: AliceDss@example.com Subject: MD5-XOR example message Message-Id: <34567809323489fd.esc@example.com> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2010 23:13:00 -0500 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=signed-data;   name=smime.p7m;   micalg*0="xor-md5: 0440010203405060708090a0b0c0d0e0f10";   micalg*1="111213415161718191a1b1c1d1e1f20212223425262728292a2b2c";   micalg*2="2d2e2f30313233435363738393a3b3c3d3e3f40" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7m MIIEqAYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIEmTCCBJUCAQExUTBPBgsqhkiG9w0BCRADDQRAAQIDBAUGBw gJCgsMDQ4PEBESEwQVFhcYGRobHB0eHyAhIiMEJSYnKCkqKywtLi8wMTIzBDU2Nzg5Ojs8 PT4/QDArBgkqhkiG9w0BBwGgHgQcVGhpcyBpcyBzb21lIHNhbXBsZSBjb250ZW50LqCCAi swggInMIIBkKADAgECAhBGNGvHgABWvBHTbi7NXXHQMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMBIxEDAO BgNVBAMTB0NhcmxSU0EwHhcNOTkwOTE5MDEwOTAyWhcNMzkxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjARMQ8wDQ YDVQQDEwZCb2JSU0EwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAKnhZ5g/OdVf8qCT QV6meYmFyDVdmpFb+x0B2hlwJhcPvaUi0DWFbXqYZhRBXM+3twg7CcmRuBlpN235ZR572a kzJKN/O7uvRgGGNjQyywcDWVL8hYsxBLjMGAgUSOZPHPtdYMTgXB9T039T2GkB8QX4enDR voPGXzjPHCyqaqfrAgMBAAGjfzB9MAwGA1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgUgMBSchaad                        Experimental                      [Page 9]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011 8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFOngkCeseCB6mtNM8kI3TiKunji7MB0GA1UdDgQWBBTo9Lhn2LOWpCrz Eaop05Vahha0JDAdBgNVHREEFjAUgRJCb2JSU0FAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQ EFBQADgYEAe45mxfEQPxAgTIhxq3tAayEz+kqV3p0OW2uUIQXA8uF+Ks2ck4iH+4u3fn1B YeHk1m354gRVYUW8ZCdEwKG9WXnZHWQ8IdZFsF1oM5LqrPFX5YF9mOY1kaM53nf06Bw7Kd x/UQeX8zbwUArdm962XjgRK/tX6oltrcmI2I/PK9MxggHfMIIB2wIBATAmMBIxEDAOBgNV BAMTB0NhcmxSU0ECEEY0a8eAAFa8EdNuLs1dcdAwTwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAw0EQAECAwQFBg cICQoLDA0ODxAREhMEFRYXGBkaGxwdHh8gISIjBCUmJygpKissLS4vMDEyMwQ1Njc4OTo7 PD0+P0CggcowGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMD kxMjEwMjMyNTAwWjAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxEgQQlmmuYRtXnoPqECtrSd3A+TBvBgkqhkiG 9w0BCTQxYjBgME8GCyqGSIb3DQEJEAMNBEABAgMEBQYHCAkKCwwNDg8QERITBBUWFxgZGh scHR4fICEiIwQlJicoKSorLC0uLzAxMjMENTY3ODk6Ozw9Pj9AoQ0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUA MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUABIGAClMpfG4IL1yAdRxWdvYKbtuFz1XKnFqo9ui7V5PndjlDut yib02knY7UtGNhg6oVEkiZHxYh/iLuoLOHSFA1P4ZacTYrEKChF4K18dsqvlFip1vn8BG/ ysFUDfbx5VcTG2Md0/NHV+qj5ihqM+Pye6Urp+5jbqVgpZOXSLfP+pI= |>sd.bin |MIIEqAYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIEmTCCBJUCAQExUTBPBgsqhkiG9w0BCRADDQRAAQIDBAUGBw |gJCgsMDQ4PEBESEwQVFhcYGRobHB0eHyAhIiMEJSYnKCkqKywtLi8wMTIzBDU2Nzg5Ojs8 |PT4/QDArBgkqhkiG9w0BBwGgHgQcVGhpcyBpcyBzb21lIHNhbXBsZSBjb250ZW50LqCCAi |swggInMIIBkKADAgECAhBGNGvHgABWvBHTbi7NXXHQMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMBIxEDAO |BgNVBAMTB0NhcmxSU0EwHhcNOTkwOTE5MDEwOTAyWhcNMzkxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjARMQ8wDQ |YDVQQDEwZCb2JSU0EwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAKnhZ5g/OdVf8qCT |QV6meYmFyDVdmpFb+x0B2hlwJhcPvaUi0DWFbXqYZhRBXM+3twg7CcmRuBlpN235ZR572a |kzJKN/O7uvRgGGNjQyywcDWVL8hYsxBLjMGAgUSOZPHPtdYMTgXB9T039T2GkB8QX4enDR |voPGXzjPHCyqaqfrAgMBAAGjfzB9MAwGA1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgUgMB |8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFOngkCeseCB6mtNM8kI3TiKunji7MB0GA1UdDgQWBBTo9Lhn2LOWpCrz |Eaop05Vahha0JDAdBgNVHREEFjAUgRJCb2JSU0FAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQ |EFBQADgYEAe45mxfEQPxAgTIhxq3tAayEz+kqV3p0OW2uUIQXA8uF+Ks2ck4iH+4u3fn1B |YeHk1m354gRVYUW8ZCdEwKG9WXnZHWQ8IdZFsF1oM5LqrPFX5YF9mOY1kaM53nf06Bw7Kd |x/UQeX8zbwUArdm962XjgRK/tX6oltrcmI2I/PK9MxggHfMIIB2wIBATAmMBIxEDAOBgNV |BAMTB0NhcmxSU0ECEEY0a8eAAFa8EdNuLs1dcdAwTwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAw0EQAECAwQFBg |cICQoLDA0ODxAREhMEFRYXGBkaGxwdHh8gISIjBCUmJygpKissLS4vMDEyMwQ1Njc4OTo7 |PD0+P0CggcowGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMD |kxMjEwMjMyNTAwWjAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxEgQQlmmuYRtXnoPqECtrSd3A+TBvBgkqhkiG |9w0BCTQxYjBgME8GCyqGSIb3DQEJEAMNBEABAgMEBQYHCAkKCwwNDg8QERITBBUWFxgZGh |scHR4fICEiIwQlJicoKSorLC0uLzAxMjMENTY3ODk6Ozw9Pj9AoQ0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUA |MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUABIGAClMpfG4IL1yAdRxWdvYKbtuFz1XKnFqo9ui7V5PndjlDut |yib02knY7UtGNhg6oVEkiZHxYh/iLuoLOHSFA1P4ZacTYrEKChF4K18dsqvlFip1vn8BG/ |ysFUDfbx5VcTG2Md0/NHV+qj5ihqM+Pye6Urp+5jbqVgpZOXSLfP+pI= |<sd.binA.2.  Multipart Signed Message   This section contains a detached signed data example.  The content   was hashed with the MD5-XOR algorithm defined in this document.  The   signature is performed using RSA with MD5.  The signature is wrapped   as a detached signed mime message.Schaad                        Experimental                     [Page 10]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011MIME-Version: 1.0To: User2@example.comFrom: BobRSA@example.comSubject: MD5-XOR signing exampleMessage-Id: <091218002550300.249@example.com>Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2010 00:25:21 -0300Content-Type: multipart/signed;  micalg*0="xor-md5: 0440010203405060708090a0b0c0d0e0f10";  micalg*1="111213415161718191a1b1c1d1e1f20212223425262728292a2b2c2d2e";  micalg*2="2f30313233435363738393a3b3c3d3e3f40";    boundary="----=_NextBoundry____Fri,_18_Dec_2009_00:25:21";    protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"This is a multi-part message in MIME format.------=_NextBoundry____Fri,_18_Dec_2009_00:25:21This is some sample content.------=_NextBoundry____Fri,_18_Dec_2009_00:25:21Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7sContent-Transfer-Encoding: base64Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.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------=_NextBoundry____Fri,_18_Dec_2009_00:25:21--Schaad                        Experimental                     [Page 11]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011A.3.  Authenticated Data Example   This section contains an authenticated data example.  The content was   hashed with the MD5-XOR algorithm defined in this document.  The   authentication was done with the HMAC-SHA1 algorithm.  The key is   transported using RSA encryption to BobRSASignByCarl certificate.MIME-Version: 1.0To: BobRSA@example.comFrom: AliceDss@example.comSubject: MD5-XOR example messageMessage-Id: <34567809323489fd.esc@example.com>Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2010 23:13:00 -0500Content-Type: application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=authenticated-data;  name=smime.p7m;  micalg*0="xor-md5: 0440010203405060708090a0b0c0d0e0f10";  micalg*1="111213415161718191a1b1c1d1e1f20212223425262728292a2b2c2d2e";  micalg*2="2f30313233435363738393a3b3c3d3e3f40"Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.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|>ad.bin|MIICRQYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAQKgggI0MIICMAIBADGBwDCBvQIBADAmMBIxEDAOBgNVBAMMB0|NhcmxSU0ECEEY0a8eAAFa8EdNuLs1dcdAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEgYCH70EpEikY7deb|859YJRAWfFondQv1D4NFltw6C1ceheWnlAU0C2WEXr3LUBXZp1/PSte29FnJxu5bXCTn1g|elMm6zNlZNWNd0KadVBcaxi1n8L52tVM5sWFGJPO5cStOyAka2ucuZM6iAnCSkn1Ju7fgU|5j2g3bZ/IM8nHTcygjAKBggrBgEFBQgBAqFPBgsqhkiG9w0BCRADDQRAAQIDBAUGBwgJCg|sMDQ4PEBESEwQVFhcYGRobHB0eHyAhIiMEJSYnKCkqKywtLi8wMTIzBDU2Nzg5Ojs8PT4/|QDArBgkqhkiG9w0BBwGgHgQcVGhpcyBpcyBzb21lIHNhbXBsZSBjb250ZW50LqKBxzAYBg|kqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wOTEyMTAyMzI1MDBa|MB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJBDESBBCWaa5hG1eeg+oQK2tJ3cD5MGwGCSqGSIb3DQEJNDFfMF0wTw|YLKoZIhvcNAQkQAw0EQAECAwQFBgcICQoLDA0ODxAREhMEFRYXGBkaGxwdHh8gISIjBCUm|JygpKissLS4vMDEyMwQ1Njc4OTo7PD0+P0CiCgYIKwYBBQUIAQIEFLjUxQ9PJFzFnWraxb|EIbVbg2xql|<ad.binSchaad                        Experimental                     [Page 12]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011Appendix B.  2008 ASN.1 Module   The ASN.1 module defined uses the 2008 ASN.1 definitions found in   [ASN.1-2008].  This module contains the ASN.1 module that contains   the required definitions for the types and values defined in this   document.  The module uses the class defined in [CMS-ASN] and   [RFC5912].  MD5-HASH-EXPERIMENT    { iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549)      pkcs(1) pkcs-9(9) smime(16) modules(0)      id-mod-MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT(999) }  DEFINITIONS IMPLICIT TAGS ::=  BEGIN   IMPORTS     -- Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) [CMS]     DigestAlgorithmIdentifier, MessageAuthenticationCodeAlgorithm,     SignatureAlgorithmIdentifier, DIGEST-ALGORITHM     FROM  CryptographicMessageSyntax-2009       { iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549)         pkcs(1) pkcs-9(9) smime(16) modules(0) id-mod-cms-2004-02(41) }     -- Common PKIX structures [RFC5912]     ATTRIBUTE     FROM PKIX-CommonTypes-2009       { iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)         security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) id-mod(0)         id-mod-pkixCommon-02(57)};     mda-xor-md5-EXPERIMENT DIGEST-ALGORITHM ::= {        IDENTIFIER id-alg-MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT        PARAMS TYPE MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT ARE required     }     id-alg-MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= {        iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549)        pkcs(1) pkcs-9(9) smime(16) id-alg(3) 13     }     MD5-XOR-EXPERIMENT ::= OCTET STRING (SIZE(64))  ENDSchaad                        Experimental                     [Page 13]

RFC 6210                 CMS Parameterized Hash               April 2011Author's Address   Jim Schaad   Soaring Hawk Consulting   EMail: ietf@augustcellars.comSchaad                        Experimental                     [Page 14]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp