Information:
|
See ANSI X9 standard "X9.42-2000, Public Key Cryptography for The Financial Services Industry: Agreement of Symmetric Keys Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography".
From: "Phillip H. Griffin" <phil.griffin@ANTISPAM.asn-1.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003
Cc: Don Johnson <DJohnson@ANTISPAM.cygnacom.com>, Jeff Stapleton <jstapleton@ANTISPAM.kpmg.com>, Pud Reaver <w3yd@ANTISPAM.arrl.net>
Olivier Dubuisson wrote:
>
> the following OID was described as:
>> OID : {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) ansi-x962(10045) signatures(4) ecdsa-with-SHA1(1)}
>> Description: ANSI X9.62 Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) signatures with SHA-1
> in the OID database.
>
> In one of the files available on your website, we've found the following information:
>> OID : {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) 10045 module(4) 1}
>> Description: Modules
>> Registrant : "X9F"
> Which one is right? "module" or "signatures"?
Both ;)
I made an error in writing the X9.62 ASN.1 and assigned this OID twice, once to the module OID and again to the signatures. Best to let signatures win, as these actually have an effect on products and code, and change the module assignment from:
ANSI-X9-62 {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) 10045 module(4) 1}
and
ANSI-X9-62 {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) 10045 module(4) 2}
to
ANSI-X9-62 {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) 10045 module(5) 1}
and
ANSI-X9-62 {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) 10045 module(5) 2}
I'll contact by Cc some "X9F" chairs and get them to ask Miles Smid to get this changed to 5 in the next X9.62 revision.
-----
From: "Phillip H. Griffin" <phil.griffin@ANTISPAM.asn-1.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003
Cc: Pud Reaver, Don Johnson, Jeff Stapleton
Olivier Dubuisson wrote:
> It looks like you did the same mistake with X9.42!
>
>> OID : {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) ansi-x942(10046) module(5)}
>> Description : ASN.1 module called "X9-42"
>> Information : ANSI X9 standard "X9.42-2000, Public Key Cryptography for The Financial Services Industry: Agreement of Symmetric Keys Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> OID : {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) ansi-x942(10046) kdMethods(5)}
>> Description : Key derivation method
>> Registrant : "X9F"
Yes, please change
ANSI-X9-42 {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) ansi-x942(10046) module(5) 1}
-- X9.42 Diffie-Hellman and Menezes-Qu-Vanstone (MQV) Symmetric Key Agreement
to
ANSI-X9-42 {iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) ansi-x942(10046) module(6) 1}
-- X9.42 Diffie-Hellman and Menezes-Qu-Vanstone (MQV) Symmetric Key Agreement
I'll contact by Cc some "X9F" chairs and get them to get this changed in the next X9.42 revision.
|
|
iso(1)
asn1der(0)
