smime-1----Page:6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
|
Proposed comment resolution TP1 In 5.8.1 Comment In section 5.8.1, I am not clear what the expected behavior of a 3126-conformant client will be if it encounters a sigPolicyHash with a hashValue of zero. I recognize that it won't crash in the ASN.1 decoding, so that is a real improvement over the original submission. However, I think the expected results should be clear so a system generating this value understands the ramifications of choosing not to include a policy hash value. I suggest expanding the Note in 5.8.1. Proposed resolution: Add to existing text: “The hashValue within the sigPolicyHash may be set to zero to indicate that the policy hash value is not known. NOTE: The use of zero policy hash value is to ensure backward compatibility with earlier versions of the current document.” The following: “If hashValue is zero then the hash value should not be checked against the calculated hash value of signature policy.” |