2006-07-20 23:14:07 GMT
A proposed revision is under discussion that may be of interest to this group as it could impact underlying implementations eventually.
Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Multiple Signer Clarification<draft-ietf-smime-cms-mult-sign-01.txt>
Normally, multiple signers are not used in EDIINT messages, but they could occur because CMS allows them.
The internet-draft says (and please read it for the exact language) that when receiving CMS messages with multiple signatures, the default rule (as I will call it) will be that the message is OK if one of the signatures is OK. It also mentions that certain communities may wish to have a different rule that replaces the default rule.
One justification for the default rule is that it will promote interoperability for use cases in which an old and a new certificate are both used, and the signers want to provide signatures using both the old and the new certificate (which may have different strengths, use new improved hashes, etc). That way, receivers who have not managed to update their systems (even after using CEM!) may still validate the signatures and continue operations.
I have not seen much discussion about security threats or risks that might arise from adhering to this rule.
Because changes to CMS options may impact security toolkits, it is worth considering whether readers of this group have any questions for the security group that is considering this change. Please send questions or assessment of risks or threats to them.