RFC 5940: Additional Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Revocation Information Choices
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) allows revocation information to be conveyed as part of the SignedData, EnvelopedData, AuthenticatedData, and AuthEnvelopedData content types. The preferred format for revocation information is the Certificate Revocation List (CRL), but an extension mechanism supports other revocation information formats. This document defines two additional revocation information formats for Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) responses and Server-Based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) requests and responses. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5940
- Published
- August 2010
- Authors
- S. Turner; R. Housley
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 9
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5276Using the Server-Based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) to Convey Long-Term Evidence RecordsCurrent
August 2008
- RFC 6277Online Certificate Status Protocol Algorithm AgilityObsoleted
June 2011
- RFC 6664S/MIME Capabilities for Public Key DefinitionsCurrent
July 2012
- RFC 5019The Lightweight Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) Profile for High-Volume EnvironmentsObsoleted
September 2007
- RFC 6960X.509 Internet Public Key Infrastructure Online Certificate Status Protocol - OCSPUpdated
June 2013
- RFC 6961The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Multiple Certificate Status Request ExtensionObsoleted
June 2013
- RFC 8739Support for Short-Term, Automatically Renewed (STAR) Certificates in the Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME)Current
March 2020
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?