[cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

Mon Apr 27 20:03:59 UTC 2015

My apologies for late response. I was out of office for an extended period of time. I should be able to finalize below email this week and get back to the thread. Thanks for your patience.

Anoosh

________________________________
From: Bruce Morton <bruce.morton at entrust.com>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 12:13 PM
To: Anoosh Saboori; Rick Andrews; Erwann Abalea; public at cabforum.org
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

Hi Anoosh,

Is there any update to this request?

Thanks, Bruce.

From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Anoosh Saboori
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 3:35 PM
To: Rick Andrews; Erwann Abalea; public at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

I am consolidating the feedbacks and get back to you shortly.

From: public-bounces at cabforum.org<mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org> [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Rick Andrews
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 10:52 AM
To: Erwann Abalea; public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

Thanks, Erwann. I missed that.

Two questions for Anoosh:

1)      What’s the rationale for 1/1/2016? I’m almost certain that Tom said it wouldn’t be required until 1/1/2017.

2)      Echoing Bruce’s comment, is there any way that you can pull all the details together in a more understandable format? IMO, I shouldn’t have to read through all 5 pages of comments to see what the policy is. It’s great that Microsoft accepts comments (and answers them!) but if someone posts a question it probably means that the policy statement is lacking, and should be updated.

-Rick

From: public-bounces at cabforum.org<mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org> [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Erwann Abalea
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 9:05 AM
To: public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

http://blogs.technet.com/b/pki/archive/2013/11/12/sha1-deprecation-policy.aspx#pi47623=2

CRLs will be SHA2-signed by 01/01/2016. See responses by "Amerk [MSFT]".

--

Erwann ABALEA

Le 23/03/2015 16:57, Rick Andrews a écrit :
Bruce,

At the Beijing meeting, Tom Albertson said that by 1/1/2017, even CRLs for SHA-1 roots had to be signed with SHA-2.

Anoosh, I assume that’s still Microsoft’s policy.

-Rick

From: public-bounces at cabforum.org<mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org> [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Morton
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 7:40 AM
To: Anoosh Saboori
Cc: CABFPub
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

Hi Anoosh,

I might be the only one, but I am a little confused regarding the Windows hashing requirements. It would be great if there was a matrix to show/confirm your requirements per Windows version.

I am thinking that the following must be covered:

•         SSL certificates

•         Code Signing certificates

•         S/MIME certificates

•         Time-stamping certificates

•         OCSP signing certificates

•         Code signing signatures

•         Time-stamp signatures

•         CRL signatures

•         OCSP signatures

•         there must be more …

An issue that I want to understand is, since some certificates can be SHA-1, can the CRL/OCSP response be signed with a SHA-1 certificate? Can the signature be SHA-1? We would need to understand this for both root and issuing CAs.

If we can nail this down, then it will be easier to draft a spec for our implementation teams.

Thanks, Bruce.

From: Anoosh Saboori [mailto:ansaboor at microsoft.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2015 8:29 PM
To: Bruce Morton
Cc: CABFPub
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

Windows enforcement dates (i.e., date at which SHA-1 certificates will be rejected by Windows) only apply to SSL and code signing certificates. All other types of certificates will be rejected on Windows side when SHA-1 pre-image attacks are deemed feasible by Microsoft.

Anoosh

From: Bruce Morton [mailto:bruce.morton at entrust.com]
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 6:47 PM
To: Anoosh Saboori
Cc: CABFPub
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Updates to Microsoft SHA-1 deprecation

Hi Anoosh,

Thank you for the update.

I don't think the policy for S/MIME certificates has been stated. I see some discussion in the comments. Could you also advise how the SHA-1 deprecation policy applies to S/MIME certificates.

Thanks, Bruce.

On Mar 20, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Anoosh Saboori <ansaboor at microsoft.com<mailto:ansaboor at microsoft.com>> wrote:
Hello,

I would like to inform you that Microsoft has made update to its SHA-1 deprecation policy to accommodate developers targeting Vista/Server 2008. Please see below.

http://blogs.technet.com/b/pki/archive/2013/11/12/sha1-deprecation-policy.aspx

Anoosh

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org<mailto:Public at cabforum.org>
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

_______________________________________________

Public mailing list

Public at cabforum.org<mailto:Public at cabforum.org>

https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20150427/0d2facab/attachment-0003.html>