RFC 3369: Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 3852.
Current document in this lineage: RFC 3370 — Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Algorithms; RFC 5652 — Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document describes the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). This syntax is used to digitally sign, digest, authenticate, or encrypt arbitrary messages.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC3369
- Published
- September 2002
- Authors
- R. Housley
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- sec
- Pages
- 52
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoleted by:
- RFC 3852
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 6 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
Read the full history of Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) →
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 3370Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) AlgorithmsUpdated
September 2002
- RFC 4853Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Multiple Signer ClarificationCurrent
April 2007
- RFC 8933Update to the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) for Algorithm Identifier ProtectionCurrent
October 2020
- RFC 9788Header Protection for Cryptographically Protected EmailCurrent
August 2025
- RFC 8437IMAP UNAUTHENTICATE Extension for Connection ReuseCurrent
August 2018
- RFC 3379Delegated Path Validation and Delegated Path Discovery Protocol RequirementsCurrent
September 2002
- RFC 3394Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Key Wrap AlgorithmCurrent
October 2002
- RFC 3456Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4) Configuration of IPsec Tunnel ModeCurrent
January 2003
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?