| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Cryptography Forum » RSA vs DH
Page 6 of 6 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
|
| Author |
Message |
| Roger Schlafly |
 Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2003 6:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"DJohn37050" <djohn37050@aol.com> wrote
Quote: Annex C of X9.30 Oct 2003 draft
(Normative)
Each entity shall obtain assurance that the domain parameters are valid
using
at least one of the following methods:
1. The entity itself generates the domain parameters according to the
specified requirements (see Section 8.3.2).
2. The entity performs an explicit domain parameter validation as
specified in Annex C.1.2.
3. The entity has received assurance from a trusted third party (e.g., a
CA) that the domain parameters were valid at the time that they were
generated
because the trusted third party either generated the domain parameters, or
has
performed an explicit domain parameter validation as specified in Annex
C.1.2.
Thanks for posting this banker document. My guess is that the bankers
will stick to CAs that require conforming DSA domain parameters.
But whether they do or not, it is very rare that anyone has verify
DSA domain parameters. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| DJohn37050 |
| Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 9:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Any one dealing with gov't or bankers on a general non-exception basis will
need to have assurance of validity of DP's. For many others, this is good
enough to suggest they want it also even when not dealing with gov't or
bankers.
Don Johnson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 6 of 6 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Jul 09, 2008 3:15 am
|
|
