Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Smcwg-public
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2023 10:13 AM
To: smcwg-public@cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [Smcwg-public] Fields for S/MIME CSRs
On 30/9/2023 4:39 μ.μ., Stephen Davidson via Smcwg-public wrote:
Hello all:
If widely supported, should we consider
into the
S/MIME BRs and other BRs :)
Thanks,
Dimitris.
Best, Stephen
*From:* Smcwg-public *On Behalf Of
*Clint Wilson via Smcwg-public
*Sent:* Friday, September 29, 2023 12:52 PM
*To:* Ben Wilson ; SMIME Certificate Working
Group
*Subject:* Re: [Smcwg-public] Fields for S/MIME CSRs
Hi
] Fields for S/MIME CSRs
Hi all,
In my opinion, CSRs should really be limited to conveying the public key and a
proof of possession of the private key; the fields included therein may act as
confirmatory signals for a CA, but shouldn’t be directly relied upon e.g. to
generate
Hi all,
In my opinion, CSRs should really be limited to conveying the public key and a
proof of possession of the private key; the fields included therein may act as
confirmatory signals for a CA, but shouldn’t be directly relied upon e.g. to
generate a tbsCertificate. Rather, the values
All,
I'm interested in gathering information from Certificate Issuers about the
kind of information that they would like to collect/extract from the CSRs
they receive from S/MIME certificate applicants. This information could be
used to refine a system to generate CSRs that result in certificates
