Subject: RE: [ers-02.txt] Questions

From: "Tobias Gondrom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 18:06:57 +0200

Denis, 

Carl and I clarify with the AD (Russ) about the correct procedure whether we need do detailed research on patents or not and how to proceed.

Tobias

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Denis Pinkas [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 5:25 PM
> To: Tobias Gondrom
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ers-02.txt] Questions
> 
> Tobias,
> 
> Surety has a lot of patents that involve the use of hashtrees used
> together
> with time-stamp tokens.
> 
> Do you have any idea if the realisations you have in mind will fall into
> these patents or outside ?
> 
> Denis
> 
> 
> > Loïc,
> >
> > Maybe to provide further info:
> >
> >
> >>Well, it's more clear to me now...
> >>ERS just proposes a syntax for EV that can be used by CSM to kepp
> >>electronic signature valid.
> >>But according to RFC-3126, ES-A is a format that reech the same target
> >>than ERS in CMS.
> >
> >
> > Yes. In some way ES-A in RFC3126 is trying to achieve the same.
> > With ES-A you can try to "re-sign" a signed file with a new layer
> wrapped around it every time a cryptographic algorithm gets weak
> (respectively before) - the concept is quite obvious and well thought for
> the use case to store only a limited number of signed documents.
> >
> > As Aleksej already described ERS also enables the possibility for long-
> term non repudiation and integrity.
> > Second aspect of ERS is that it scales for large volumes of signed
> documents. With ES-A you have to wrap around every file another layer.
> > With ERS you just create new hashtrees - which is if you think of e.g.
> about 10^6 to 10^9 documents a lot better concerning performance.
> (especially if only e.g. a public key algorithm gets weak or a used key
> length is no longer sufficient.)
> >
> > Concerning RFC3126: From my opinion it is not necessary that ERS will
> obsolete ES-A. But I surely expect that many big storage, Document
> Management System and ECM vendors will implement ERS and not ES-A. So in
> B2B and B2C we will most probably seeing a lot of ERS.
> >
> > The coexistence of ES-A and ERS will be something to discuss when ERS is
> finally an RFC.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > 	Tobias
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>So my question is, if i want to archive signature, i have the choice
> >>between RFC3126 ES-A or ERS in CMS. Am I right ?
> >>
> >>If I am, will ES-A be obsoleted by ERS in CSM (as shown in Appendix A in
> >>[ers-02])  ?
> >>
> >>But be sure that I understand ERS is more than just a way to maintain a
> >>singature valid.
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>
> >>Loïc
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Message d'origine-----
> >>>De : A. Jerman Blazic [mailto:[email-masked]]
> >>>Envoyé : vendredi 29 avril 2005 11:48
> >>>À : HOUSSIER Loic RD-MAPS-ISS; [email-masked]
> >>>Objet : RE: [ers-02.txt] Questions
> >>>
> >>>Loic
> >>>
> >>>This is what I didn't state. You have to distinguish the
> >>>level of the two
> >>>approaches. ERS deals mainly with providing syntax on (time)
> >>>evidence and
> >>>evidence on integrity of a data, while RFC3126 provides data
> >>>strucutre for
> >>>long term validity of a digital signatures. In this case RFC
> >>>can rely on ERS
> >>>for time and integrity evidence of a signature, so it is a
> >>>more low level
> >>>syntax. Or in other words, if you equip CMS with accredited
> >>>time, you can
> >>>ged basic ERS structure (of course ERS is more than that:
> >>>e.g. grouping and
> >>>hash trees). This is why I said the approaches of LTANS vs. XAdES are
> >>>somehow different, while addressing similar problems.
> >>>
> >>>BR
> >>>
> >>>Aleksej
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: HOUSSIER Loic RD-MAPS-ISS
> >>>>[mailto:[email-masked]]
> >>>>Sent: 29. april 2005 11:24
> >>>>To: A. Jerman Blazic; [email-masked]
> >>>>Subject: RE: [ers-02.txt] Questions
> >>>>
> >>>>Aleksej,
> >>>>Thanks for your reply.
> >>>>
> >>>>So, to demonstrate the existantce and stability of signature
> >>>>on particular, there will be two ways in PKIX community:
> >>>>One using rfc3126, one with ERS attribute within a CMS
> >>>>signature object. Am I wrong ?
> >>>>
> >>>>Loïc
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>-----Message d'origine-----
> >>>>>De : A. Jerman Blazic [mailto:[email-masked]] Envoyé :
> >>>>
> >>>>vendredi 29
> >>>>
> >>>>>avril 2005 11:08 À : HOUSSIER Loic RD-MAPS-ISS;
> >>>>
> >>>[email-masked]
> >>>
> >>>>>Objet : RE: [ers-02.txt] Questions
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Dear Loic
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I would be very careful here. XAdES for example is like the
> >>>>
> >>>>name says:
> >>>>
> >>>>>syntax for extended signature, which builds on top of a
> >>>>
> >>>>signature and
> >>>>
> >>>>>includes all needed complementary data to provide long term
> >>>>
> >>>>stability
> >>>>
> >>>>>of digital signatures. The LTANS position, as I understand it,
> >>>>>distances from such approach and deals with long term
> >>>>
> >>>stability of
> >>>
> >>>>>data. ERS in this case defines requirements on how to
> >>>>
> >>>>demonstrate the
> >>>>
> >>>>>existence and stability of data (not signature on
> >>>>
> >>>particular) on a
> >>>
> >>>>>timeline. It does not define the data structure nor the
> >>>>
> >>>>syntax and at
> >>>>
> >>>>>the moment you can freely use any interpretation of an
> >>>>
> >>>>evidence record
> >>>>
> >>>>>including CMS. But XAdES? I am not so sure....
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Best regards
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Aleksej
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>From: [email-masked]
> >>>>>>[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> >>>>>
> >>>HOUSSIER Loic
> >>>
> >>>>>>RD-MAPS-ISS
> >>>>>>Sent: 29. april 2005 10:46
> >>>>>>To: [email-masked]
> >>>>>>Subject: [ers-02.txt] Questions
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Reading ERS_02, I have question :
> >>>>>>It s said that ER can be part of the Archive or can be
> >>>>>
> >>>stored as
> >>>
> >>>>>>another file. What I understand is that we can (using CMS
> >>>>>
> >>>>or XADES)
> >>>>
> >>>>>>do ER as part of the Archive.
> >>>>>>But Is it compliant with ERS ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Thanks
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Loïc
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>-----Message d'origine-----
> >>>>>>>De : [email-masked]
> >>>>>>>[mailto:[email-masked]] De la part de
> >>>>>>>[email-masked] Envoyé : vendredi 8 avril 2005
> >>>>>>
> >>>>21:29 À :
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>[email-masked] Cc : [email-masked] Objet : I-D
> >>>>>>>ACTION:draft-ietf-ltans-ers-02.txt
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Internet-Drafts
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>directories.
> >>>>>>>This draft is a work item of the Long-Term Archive and
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Notary Services
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Working Group of the IETF.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>	Title		: Evidence Record Syntax (ERS)
> >>>>>>>	Author(s)	: R. Brandner, et al.
> >>>>>>>	Filename	: draft-ietf-ltans-ers-02.txt
> >>>>>>>	Pages		: 25
> >>>>>>>	Date		: 2005-4-8
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>In many scenarios, users need to be able to ensure and
> >>>>>>
> >>>>prove the
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>   existence and integrity of data, especially digitally
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>signed data,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>in
> >>>>>>>   a common and reproducible way over a long and possibly
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>undetermined
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   period of time.  This document specifies the syntax and
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>processing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>of
> >>>>>>>   an Evidence Record, designed for long-term
> >>>>>>
> >>>>non-repudiation of
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>   existence of data, which particularly can be used for
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>conservation
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>of
> >>>>>>>   evidence of digitally signed data.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltans-ers-02.txt
> >>>
> >>>>>>>To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>message to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>the body of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>the message.
> >>>>>>>You can also visit
> >>>>>>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce
> >>>>>>>to change your subscription settings.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Login with the
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail
> >>>>>>
> >>>>address. After
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then
> >>>>>>>	"get draft-ietf-ltans-ers-02.txt".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
> >>>>>>>http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or
> >>>>>>>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Send a message to:
> >>>>>>>	[email-masked].
> >>>>>>>In the body type:
> >>>>>>>	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltans-ers-02.txt".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
> >>>>>>>	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.
> >>>>>>
> >>>> To use this
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>before the "FILE"
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>	command.  To decode the response(s), you will
> >>>>>>
> >>>>need "munpack" or
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>mail readers
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
> >>>>>>>	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which
> >>>>>>
> >>>>have been split
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>	up into multiple messages), so check your local
> >>>>>>
> >>>>documentation on
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>	how to manipulate these messages.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant
> >>>>>>
> >>>>mail reader
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII
> >>>>>>
> >>>>version of the
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>Internet-Draft.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>