IETF-SSH archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Comments on draft-ietf-secsh-x509-00



Henrick Hellström wrote:

Joseph Galbraith wrote:

Henrick Hellström wrote:

I can only see a point in using X.509 certificates with SSH, in case
secure distribution of public keys between the server and the clients is
not feasible.

[SNIP]

To be honest, this covers most SSH cases, right?

[SNIP]

No, there is no 'not' missing. Example:

"A host server certificate SHOULD include the id_kp_serverAuth OID in the extKeyUsage extension, and a client user certificate SHOULD include the id_kp_clientAuth OID. The extKeyUsage extension SHOULD be marked as critical. Client implementations SHOULD reject host server certificates that contain the id_kp_clientAuth OID in the extKeyUsage extension, and server implementations SHOULD reject client certificates that contain the id_kp_serverAuth OID in the extKeyUsage extension."

One part is "Public Key Authentication Method" and example above cover only it. Other method is "Host-Based Authentication" and in this case host key (certificate) may contain both extentions id_kp_clientAuth and id_kp_serverAuth.

Please note that I don't suggest that the above paragraph should be added. It just serves as an example of an application specific PKI policy.

I agree with this.

RFC 3280 cover enough "Certificate Extensions".

--
Roumen Petrov
http://roumenpetrov.info/openssh/





Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index