-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 181
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify validation step for packed attestation certificate for RPs. #2000
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems fair to me. But I also wonder, could we perhaps solve this with less text? I'm thinking if we re-order the steps of the verification procedure like so:
- If attestnCert contains an extension with OID
1.3.6.1.4.1.45724.1.1.4
(id-fido-gen-ce-aaguid
) verify that the value of this extension matches theaaguid
in authenticatorData.- Verify that attestnCert meets the requirements in § 8.2.1 Packed Attestation Statement Certificate Requirements.
and then add "other" to the latter step like so:
- Verify that attestnCert meets the other requirements in § 8.2.1 Packed Attestation Statement Certificate Requirements.
Would that suffice to clarify the issue?
agreed Co-authored-by: Emil Lundberg <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
SHA: 065b836 Reason: push, by sbweeden Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Addresses #1998
Preview | Diff