[Cscwg-public] [EXTERNAL] Re: Re FIPS tokens supporting RSA 3072

Ian McMillan ianmcm at microsoft.com
Wed Mar 17 20:42:22 UTC 2021

Hi Folks,

This key size effective date has already been delayed by 6 months. I am not keen on further delaying the requirement of 3072 keys for RSA due to a lack of tokens that support the requirement in the CSBRs. As Bruce calls out, there are other means to which subscribers can secure their private keys to meet the requirements outside of a token provided by a CA. If this change in key size is what pushes subscribers to use HSMs (on-prem or cloud based services) or signing services, it may serve as the call to action for token suppliers on a requirement they have frankly seemed to have overlooked for some time now.

I'll be interested to discuss how much additional time the group feels is needed here, and how best we can help accelerate the transition.


From: Cscwg-public <cscwg-public-bounces at cabforum.org> On Behalf Of Adriano Santoni via Cscwg-public
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 9:31 AM
To: Bruce Morton <Bruce.Morton at entrust.com>
Cc: cscwg-public at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [Cscwg-public] [EXTERNAL] Re: Re FIPS tokens supporting RSA 3072

Hi Bruce,

I certainly agree that - if the said token is the only device available on the market meeting the said requirement, as it seems to be the case -- we should promptly revise the effective date (June 1st, just three months from now) of the transition to 3072 bits being mandatory for RSA keys.

If nothing else, because it would be a really bad thing to impose a requirement that involves sourcing devices from a single possible supplier, thereby favouring a monopoly. I hope everyone agrees on this principle.


Il 17/03/2021 16:45, Bruce Morton ha scritto:
Hi Adriano,

We should discuss this issue at the next meeting. I do think that there are options to using the SafeNet token, but that might include subscriber hosted HSM, public-cloud HSM or Signing Service HSM.

I think we all understand that the options might be hard to implement before 1 June 2021 deadline.


From: Cscwg-public <cscwg-public-bounces at cabforum.org><mailto:cscwg-public-bounces at cabforum.org> On Behalf Of Adriano Santoni via Cscwg-public
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 11:18 AM
To: cscwg-public at cabforum.org<mailto:cscwg-public at cabforum.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Cscwg-public] Re FIPS tokens supporting RSA 3072

WARNING: This email originated outside of Entrust.
DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.

I should have written "the only CC token", as the FIPS version of the said token does not support RSA > 2048 bit....

But my question remains (after replacing "FIPS" with "CC").

Il 17/03/2021 16:08, Adriano Santoni via Cscwg-public ha scritto:

I already posted this question yesterday, but apparently it did not get through.

I was asking: is the SafeNet eToken 5110 CC the only FIPS token supporting RSA 3072 available on the market?

I am investigating this matter myself, and although I am not finished it seems there aren't many... possibly just one.

If so, it would be a rather unfortunate situation competition-wise.



Cscwg-public mailing list

Cscwg-public at cabforum.org<mailto:Cscwg-public at cabforum.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/cscwg-public/attachments/20210317/5f17c232/attachment.html>

More information about the Cscwg-public mailing list