<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15. sep. 2014 15:51, Erwann Abalea
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416EEE4.6060207@opentrust.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> Le 15/09/2014 13:16, Håvard Molland
a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416CA8B.70403@opera.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15. sep. 2014 11:15, Erwann
Abalea wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416AE20.4070105@opentrust.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">It would be hard to discuss about
SM2/SM3 at CABForum level when there's so few analysis and
publications of these algorithms.<br>
<br>
SM2 seems to be a set of asymetric cryptographic primitives
working on ECC, providing signature, key exchange, and
encipherment functions; respectively similar to ECDSA, ECDH,
and maybe ECIES?. There's also a new 256bits prime curve.<br>
SM3 is a hash function, MD design, similar to SHA256 with a
few modifications.<br>
<br>
What could be discussed at CABF level:<br>
- adoption of the new curve, can it be used with ECDSA to
sign certificates/CRLs/OCSP? (then we should also talk about
Brainpool family, ANSSI FRP256v1, Curve25519, and others)<br>
- adoption of SM3 in signatures, with ECDSA? That's a more
difficult question, we don't already agree on what to do
with SHA1, there's little to no analysis of SM3. The team
behind SM3 include some people involved in the end of
MD4/MD5/RIPEMD in 2004/2005, I guess they know what they're
doing, but the algo still needs to be challenged. If we talk
about SM3, we might as well talk about GOST R34.11-94, GOST
R34.11-2012, and maybe a lot of others...<br>
- adoption of SM2 in signature mode (SM2 part 2)? On which
curve, with which hash algorithm? An even more difficult
question; there's more info about EC-Schnorr or EdDSA than
there's about SM2. Again, other algorithms such as GOST
R34.10-2001 or GOST R34.10-2012 might as well be discussed,
and maybe ECKCDSA (Korean) or ECGDSA (German)<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Any new algorithm should offer improvements on the existing
algorithms, such as improved security, new security features or
speed. I'm not sure we should add new algorithms simply for the
sake of being alternatives.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I agree, that's what SHOULD drive the inclusion of algorithms or
parameters. Based on that, the CABF SHOULD NOT discuss about
approval of these new things (not yet)
</blockquote>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416EEE4.6060207@opentrust.com" type="cite"> <br>
Others MAY think differently, such as Russia, where GOST-approved
algorithms are mandatory</blockquote>
You mean it's mandatory for servers to offer GOST? Surely they can't
demand browser support?<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416EEE4.6060207@opentrust.com" type="cite">.
And we DO see GOST-approved hash algorithms used in OCSP requests
(to produce the issuerNameHash and issuerKeyHash). Now.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416EEE4.6060207@opentrust.com" type="cite"> <br>
What if China mandates the use of their own algorithms?<br>
</blockquote>
If every regime wants their own ciphers, it will be impossible to
manage. Instead of adding a new cipher suit per country/regime, the
list should consist of relatively few ciphers everyone could agree
on. Hopefully the current ciphers would be such a list, although it
might be a bit US centric. This discussion is a bit to big for CA/B
forum alone though.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5416EEE4.6060207@opentrust.com" type="cite"> <br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Erwann ABALEA
</pre>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Public@cabforum.org">Public@cabforum.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public">https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
---
Opera Software</pre>
</body>
</html>