[cabfpub] BR "corrections" ballot
gerv at mozilla.org
Mon Mar 21 04:56:41 MST 2016
On 21/03/16 11:49, Rob Stradling wrote:
> What would be the downside of saying that subject:commonName, if
> included in the cert, MUST contain either the A-label form or U-label
> form of one of the SAN:dNSName values?
Converting using IDNA2003 or IDNA2008? :-))
In a data structure designed for computer consumption, why would you not
want to write the computer-readable, as opposed to human-readable,
version of the label? My security spider-sense tells me that allowing
multiple "equivalent" forms of a name in a security context, rather than
requiring a single canonical form, is a good way of getting nasty bugs.
More information about the Public