Opened 3 years ago

Closed 3 years ago

#20278 closed defect (implemented)

cert-spec.txt contains incomplete reference / documentation for certificate types

Reported by: patrickod Owned by: dgoulet
Priority: Medium Milestone: Tor: 0.2.9.x-final
Component: Core Tor/Tor Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords: tor-spec, review-group-11
Cc: Actual Points:
Parent ID: Points:
Reviewer: nickm Sponsor:

Description

The cert-spec.txt document references various Certificate types in a section 4.2, but there exists no such complete documentation in any of the -spec.txt files.

The section 4.2 that it appears to reference is in prop 220 which includes specs for each of the cert types mentioned:

  • Link key certificate certified by Ed25519 signing key
  • Ed25519 TLS authentication key certified by Ed25519 signing key
  • RSA cross-certificate for Ed25519 identity key

Child Tickets

Change History (7)

comment:1 Changed 3 years ago by arma

I suggested that Patrick file this ticket, since we want all our specs to be in a foo-spec.txt file, rather than relying on text still in a proposals document.

It's possible that this ticket is redundant with some other already filed ticket, but I didn't see one.

comment:2 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

Milestone: Tor: 0.2.9.x-final

comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by dgoulet

Status: newneeds_review

I believe ultimately what we could do is refer to the proposal in cert-spec.txt for more information on the cert type. In this case, prop220 is in Accepted state so adding the types to that spec makes sense.

I did a minor cleanup of that section in ticket20278_01. What do we think?

comment:4 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

Keywords: review-group-11 added

comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

Owner: set to dgoulet
Status: needs_reviewassigned

setting owner

comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

Status: assignedneeds_review

comment:7 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

Resolution: implemented
Reviewer: nickm
Status: needs_reviewclosed

Merged. Long-term, the spec should refer to a proposal, but since the proposal is in-progress, we may as well refer to it as appropriate.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.