RFC Errata

Errata Search

Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (2)

RFC3110, "RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the Domain Name System (DNS)", May 2001

Source of RFC: dnsext (int)

Errata ID: 2811

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: George Barwood
Date Reported: 2011-05-21
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2012-05-01

Section 3 says:

Leading zero bytes are permitted in the RSA/SHA1 algorithm signature.

It should say:

Leading zero bytes MUST be added to the RSA/SHA1 algorithm signature 
so that the signature size in bytes is equal to the size of n in bytes.


The Original Text implies that zero-padding of RSA signaturs is optional, however the underlying standard requires zero padding, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2437#section-8.1.1

"4. Convert the signature representative s to a signature S of length k octets: S = I2OSP (s, k)"

where k is the length of the modulus in bytes. If the extra bytes are not added, standard RSA libraries will fail to verify the signature about 1% of the time when the padding occurs.

Errata ID: 4502

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Mikko Rantanen
Date Reported: 2015-10-14
Verifier Name: Brian Haberman
Date Verified: 2015-10-14

Section 4 says:

conservative choice would be 65537 (F4, the fourth fermat number).

It should say:

conservative choice would be 65537 (F4, the fifth Fermat number).


Numbering of Fermat numbers starts from zero. F4 and 65537 agree, but F4 is fifth Fermat number in the series, not fourth.

Report New Errata

Search RFCs
Advanced Search