Besides providing a guarantee of authenticity the security scheme must allow for a non repudiable record of the transaction to be made.
The need for such a scheme may be seen from the conference registration forms:
The multiple submit actions required are unsatisfactory. It would be preferable to implement this confirmation within the client.
This example demonstrates the need for purpose specific signatures. For example a user should have the option of being informed before being commited to pay money. It should be expected that a user will have multiple signatures for different purposes. One mechanism for dealing with this problem would be to define signature capabilities such as Identify, Payment, Delegate etc.
Issues:
Issues:
A standalone certificate is a signed object.
Digest-Boundary: RSA-MD5, Random string Start-Date: 01 Jan 1994 Expiry-Date: 31 Dec 1994 Hardware-Id: hardware address of machine Message-URI: URI of optional external message MIC-Info: RSA-MD5, digest of the external message MIC-Head: RSA, RSA-MD5, signed digest of the external body
The form of a message certificate should enable it to be stored with the signed object and used to create a message header.
A certificate might incorporate additional, contract specific information through additional X- format headers.
Phillip M. Hallam-Baker, CERN ECP PTG hallam@alws.cern.ch Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, CERN CN, frystryk@ptsun00.cern.ch Ari Luotonen, CERN ECP (Now at Mosaic Communications Corp)