Subject: RE: Meaning of Non-repudiation

From: Peter Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 11:24:45 -0700

Does this mean that in a challenge-response scheme that does not
use nonces (it specifically uses timestamps instead, e.g. X.509 
procedures) that one uses dataSign?

>>>>Bill,
>>>>
>>>>I have no problem with X.509 and PKIX following Trevor's approach.
>>>>Deprecate (using the strongest possible terms) the existing KeyUsage
>>>>OID, and define a new KeyUsage OID identical to the old one 
>>>>except that
>>>>bits 0 and 1 are replaced by nonceSign and dataSign.
>>>>
>>>>Dave

---

From: "Santosh Chokhani" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 14:38:12 -0400

I would still call the entity authentication and it will come under one
bit for entity authentication as opposed to the other bit for digital
signature.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Williams [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 2:25 PM
To: 'Santosh Chokhani'; 'David P. Kemp'; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Meaning of Non-repudiation

Does this mean that in a challenge-response scheme that does not use
nonces (it specifically uses timestamps instead, e.g. X.509 
procedures) that one uses dataSign?

>>>>OID, and define a new KeyUsage OID identical to the old one except 
>>>>that bits 0 and 1 are replaced by nonceSign and dataSign.
>>>>
>>>>Dave