[openssl-users] Doubt regarding O-SSL and setting the duration of certificates

[Frank Migge]

This is an interesting statement.

>> should use the GeneralizedTime value 99991231235959Z (10) in the
notAfter field ...
>> Solutions verifying a DevID are expected to accept this value
indefinitely

Isn't using that large a time value in certificates problematic? Not all
systems can handle it today. At best, they may gracefully decline it as
invalid. Windows up to version 10 is unable to display it, and fails to
work with such a cert.

Even closer into the future, 20 years from now, I am not sure how far
the industry came in dealing with the upcoming year 2038 problem on
32bit systems. It is indirectly related to OpenSSL when system time is
used, converted to or from. Particularly in IOT/ICS industry situations
with scaled down CPUs, long device lifespans and support requirements,
functional validation with future time settings would definitely be a
good idea on the test plan.

Frank
> Robert Moskowitz <mailto:rgm at htt-consult.com>
> Wednesday, September 13, 2017 12:57 AM
> IEEE 802.1ARce (latest draft addendum) specifies:
>
> 8.7 validity
>
> The time period over which the DevID issuer expects the device to be used.
>
> All times are stated in the Universal Coordinated Time (UTC) time
> zone. Times up to and including
> 23:59:59 December 31, 2049 UTC are encoded as UTCTime as
> YYMMDDHHmmssZ. Times later than
> 23:59:59 December 31, 2049 UTC are encoded as GeneralizedTime as
> YYYYMMDDHHmmssZ.
>
> The time the DevID is created is encoded in the notBefore field of
> DevID certificates. Each DevID chain
> certificate has a notBefore value that encodes a time that is the same
> as or prior to that of any DevID
> certificate that relies on the chain for certificate validation.
>
> The latest time a DevID is expected to be used is encoded in the
> notAfter field of the DevID certificate.
> Each DevID chain certificate has a notBefore value that encodes a time
> that is the same as or later than that of any DevID certificate that
> relies on the chain for certificate validation.
>
> Devices possessing an IDevID are expected to operate indefinitely into
> the future and should use the
> GeneralizedTime value 99991231235959Z (10) in the notAfter field of
> IDevID certificates. Solutions
> verifying a DevID are expected to accept this value indefinitely.
> Values in notAfter fields are treated as
> specified in RFC 5280.
>
> Footnote: (10)
> This value corresponds to one second before the year 10 000; note the
> creation of an opportunity for the Y10K bug fix industry.
>
> =====================
>
> It is really rare to find humor in IEEE specifications!
>
> Bob
>
> On 09/12/2017 11:39 AM, Alejandro Pulido wrote:
>
> Robert Moskowitz <mailto:rgm at htt-consult.com>
> Tuesday, September 12, 2017 11:30 PM
> Depends on the question....
>
> 'Infinite' duration is used in IEEE 802.1AR Device Identities.  The
> concept is the vendor installs the certificate in read-only memory. 
> It is expected to be good for the life of the device.
>
> On 09/11/2017 05:32 AM, Alejandro Pulido wrote:
>
> Alejandro Pulido <mailto:alexxplus at hotmail.com>
> Monday, September 11, 2017 6:32 PM
> Dear team of OpenSSL,
>  
> First of all, congratulations for your invaluable work!
>  
> I have a question regarding the issue of certificates X.509 with
> infinite duration and I don't know where to submit it.
>  
> Please, could you help me?
>  
> Thank you very much and kind regards
>
>
>
> */Alejandro J Pulido Duque/*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-users/attachments/20170913/d58ce53d/attachment.html>