[gtld-tech] [tmch-tech] Test SMDs files now available

[Gould, James]

Francisco,

It's actually a factor of the XML parser and the DSIG software, where based on my experience white space is  a factor for validation.  Troubleshooting validation issues is not a trivial task.  Removing the extra white space and carriage returns (pretty print) will reduce the size and reduce the risk of validation errors.

--

JG

[cid:E2B88BF0-2828-4E99-BBF8-D8B5BDCFEAFE]

James Gould
Principal Software Engineer
jgould at verisign.com

703-948-3271 (Office)
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
VerisignInc.com

From: Francisco Obispo <fobispo at isc.org<mailto:fobispo at isc.org>>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2013 3:41 PM
To: Gustavo Lozano <gustavo.lozano at icann.org<mailto:gustavo.lozano at icann.org>>
Cc: James Gould <jgould at verisign.com<mailto:jgould at verisign.com>>, "tmch-tech at icann.org<mailto:tmch-tech at icann.org>" <tmch-tech at icann.org<mailto:tmch-tech at icann.org>>, "gtld-tech at icann.org<mailto:gtld-tech at icann.org>" <gtld-tech at icann.org<mailto:gtld-tech at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [tmch-tech] Test SMDs files now available

With a good parser none of this should be an issue.

Removing unnecessary whitespace and carrier returns will reduce the size
Of the resulting payload which is nice.

C14N should take care of format before signature validation.

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 5, 2013, at 10:28 AM, Gustavo Lozano <gustavo.lozano at icann.org<mailto:gustavo.lozano at icann.org>> wrote:

James,

Let me discuss this with the development team, but before, I want to have feedback from the community about the following:

I suppose that also the carriage returns should be eliminated and not only white spaces. This will create big lines (between 8K and 16K bytes). Does anyone foresee implementation problems with big lines of text?

Has anyone have had success in using the test SMD XML (with the white spaces and carriage returns) in their EPP implementations including client libraries?

Even without whitespaces and carriage returns there is still risk that implementations may break the signature if precautions are not taken. One possibility for mitigating this problem is requiring Registrars to send the base64-encoded blob from the SMD file (decoding base64 sounds cheaper than customer support).

I have received questions about the use of <smd:signedMark> vs <smd:encodedSignedMark> in EPP.

My question to all of you is:
How many of you will require <smd:signedMark>-only by policy?
How many of you will require <smd:encodedSignedMark>-only by policy?
How many of you will support both?

Thank you,
Gustavo


From: <Gould>, James <JGould at verisign.com<mailto:JGould at verisign.com>>
Date: Saturday, August 3, 2013 7:33 AM
To: Gustavo Lozano <gustavo.lozano at icann.org<mailto:gustavo.lozano at icann.org>>
Cc: "tmch-tech at icann.org<mailto:tmch-tech at icann.org>" <tmch-tech at icann.org<mailto:tmch-tech at icann.org>>, "gtld-tech at icann.org<mailto:gtld-tech at icann.org>" <gtld-tech at icann.org<mailto:gtld-tech at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [tmch-tech] Test SMDs files now available

Gustavo,

In reviewing the sample SMD's I notice that the decoded signed marks are pretty printed with spaces.  I recommend that no spaces be used with the signed marks since it introduces additional risk of validation errors.  The spaces do not add any value since they are base64 encoded and software could pretty print the XML if needed outside of the validation flow.

JG

James F. Gould
Principal Engineer
Verisign

jgould at verisign.com<mailto:jgould at verisign.com>

On Jul 16, 2013, at 1:41 AM, "Gustavo Lozano" <gustavo.lozano at icann.org<mailto:gustavo.lozano at icann.org>> wrote:

Colleagues,

Information about the recently published test SMDs files can be found in the following link:
http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/smd-test-repository-15jul13-en.pdf

The different parties involved in the TMCH project have developed test SMDs files in order to obtain feedback from the community and assist implementers of the SMD technology in testing their own implementations. These test SMDs files have been generated using the same models of HSMs (ICANN-TMCH-CA and TMV) that are going to be used in production. The code used to generate them is the latest version of the TMCH code developed by the different parties involved in the TMCH project. These test SMDs files should cover the different test cases and comply with http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lozano-tmch-smd-02

We appreciate your feedback no later than July 23, please test them and send your feedback to the mailing list or to me privately. We understand that this is a short period of time and any bug found after this date will be corrected, but it is extremely helpful if you could send your feedback before this date.

Note: These test SMDs files include the TMV and CA certificate embedded in the XML, new test SMDs files are going to be generated soon in order to remove the CA certificate. The inclusion of the CA certificate in the SMD file should not have an impact on the tests performed with these SMDs files.

Thank you,
Gustavo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/attachments/20130805/46887dc4/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 8A7A655D-9ED0-4D38-898D-E9E8B754666E[18].png
Type: image/png
Size: 4109 bytes
Desc: 8A7A655D-9ED0-4D38-898D-E9E8B754666E[18].png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/attachments/20130805/46887dc4/8A7A655D-9ED0-4D38-898D-E9E8B754666E18-0001.png>