Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime

From	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime
Date	2016-02-04 18:40 +0100
Message-ID	<qYw2T-57e-49@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <qT2yu-8hL-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNlDP-14y-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNlDP-14y-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qT2RQ-8pt-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qY8tB-4kE-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	Intel Corporation

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 16:28:41 +0000
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:

> One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > > > As for 24:xx:yy times - I'm split about this. This code doesn't
> > > > require a bijective decoding anyway (and if it did, 24:00:00 and
> > > > 00:00:00 mapping to the same time64_t would be problem enough) so this
> > > > is sure safe. On the other hand, a cert with a 24:xx:yy time that's
> > > > not 24:00:00 probably should be regarded as invalid and not trusted
> > > > for that reason alone.  
> > > 
> > > Feel free to argue that one with Linus:-/  
> > 
> > Pedantic hat on 24:00:01 is also potentially valid. The ANSI and ISO
> > standards allow for double leap seconds even though CCIR-460 doesn't
> > allow it to actually happen.  
> 
> Did you mean 24:00:01 or 23:59:61?

I'd have to actually go and real all the standards for that one.

Alan

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in GeneralizedTime David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-02-03 17:30 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] X.509: Handle midnight alternative notation in  GeneralizedTime One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> - 2016-02-04 18:40 +0100

csiph-web