| DNSOP Working Group | O. Sury |
| Internet-Draft | Internet Systems Consortium |
| Updates: 7873 (if approved) | W. Toorop |
| Intended status: Standards Track | NLnet Labs |
| Expires: March 12, 2020 | D. Eastlake 3rd |
| Futurewei Technologies | |
| M. Andrews | |
| Internet Systems Consortium | |
| September 9, 2019 |
Interoperable Domain Name System (DNS) Server Cookies
draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies-00
DNS cookies, as specified in RFC 7873, are a lightweight DNS transaction security mechanism that provides limited protection to DNS servers and clients against a variety of denial-of-service and amplification, forgery, or cache poisoning attacks by off-path attackers.
This document provides precise directions for creating Server Cookies so that an anycast server set including diverse implementations will interoperate with standard clients.
This document updates [RFC7873]
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 12, 2020.
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
DNS cookies, as specified in [RFC7873], are a lightweight DNS transaction security mechanism that provides limited protection to DNS servers and clients against a variety of denial-of-service and amplification, forgery, or cache poisoning attacks by off-path attackers. This document specifies a means of producing interoperable strong cookies so that an anycast server set including diverse implementations can be easily configured to interoperate with standard clients.
The threats considered for DNS Cookies and the properties of the DNS Security features other than DNS Cookies are discussed in [RFC7873].
In [RFC7873] in Section 6 it is "RECOMMENDED for simplicity that the same Server Secret be used by each DNS server in a set of anycast servers." However, how precisely a Server Cookie is calculated from this Server Secret, is left to the implementation.
This guidance has led to a gallimaufry of DNS Cookie implementations, calculating the Server Cookie in different ways. As a result, DNS Cookies are impractical to deploy on multi-vendor anycast networks, because even when all DNS Software share the same secret, as RECOMMENDED in Section 6 of [RFC7873], the Server Cookie constructed by one implementation cannot generally be validated by another.
There is no need for DNS client (resolver) Cookies to be interoperable across different implementations. Each client need only be able to recognize its own cookies. However, this document does contain recommendations for constructing Client Cookies in a Client protecting fashion.
Section Section 2 summarises the changes to [RFC7873].
In Section Section 3 suggestions for constructing a Client Cookie are given.
In Section Section 4 instructions for constructing a Server Cookie are given.
In Section Section 5 instructions on updating Server Secrets are given.
In Section Section 6 the different hash functions usable for DNS Cookie construction are listed. [FNV] and HMAC-SHA-256-64 [RFC6234] are deprecated and [SipHash-2.4] is introduced as a REQUIRED hash function for server side DNS Cookie implementations.
IANA considerations are in Section 7.
Acknowledgements are in Appendix A.
Test vectors are in Appendix B.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
In its Appendices A.1 and B.1, [RFC7873] provides example "simple" algorithms for computing Client and Server Cookies, respectively. These algorithms MUST NOT be used as the resulting cookies are too weak when evaluated against modern security standards.
In its Appendix B.2, [RFC7873] provides an example "more complex" server algorithm. This algorithm is replaced by the interoperable specification in Section 4 of this document, which MUST be used by Server Cookie implementations.
This document has suggestions on Client Cookie construction in Section 3. The previous example in Appendix A.2 of [RFC7873] is NOT RECOMMENDED.
The Client Cookie is a nonce and should be treated as such. For simplicity, it can be calculated from Server IP Address, and a secret known only to the Client. The Client Cookie SHOULD have at least 64-bits of entropy. If a secure pseudorandom function (like [SipHash-2.4]) is used, there's no need to change Client secret often. It is reasonable to change the Client secret only if it has been compromised or after a relatively long period of time such as no longer than a year.
It is RECOMMENDED but not required that the following pseudorandom function be used to construct the Client Cookie:
Client-Cookie = MAC_Algorithm(
Server IP Address, Client Secret )
where "|" indicates concatenation.
Previously, the recommended algorithm to compute the Client Cookie included Client IP Address as an input to the MAC_Algorithm. However, when implementing the DNS Cookies, several DNS vendors found impractical to include the Client IP as the Client Cookie is typically computed before the Client IP address is known. Therefore, the requirement to put Client IP address as input to was removed, and it simply RECOMMENDED to disable the DNS Cookies when privacy is required.
The Server Cookie is effectively a Message Authentication Code (MAC) and should be treated as such. The Server Cookie is calculated from the Client Cookie, a series of Sub-Fields specified below, the Client IP address, and a Server Secret known only to the servers responding on the same address in an anycast set.
Changing the Server Secret regularly is RECOMMENDED but, when a secure pseudorandom function is used, it need not be changed too frequent. For example once a month would be adequate. See Section 5 on operator and implementation guidelines for updating a Server Secret.
The 128-bit Server Cookie consists of Sub-Fields: a 1 octet Version Sub-Field, a 3 octet Reserved Sub-Field, a 4 octet Timestamp Sub-Field and an 8 octet Hash Sub-Field.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Timestamp | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Hash | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The Version Sub-Field prescribes the structure and Hash calculation formula. This document defines Version 1 to be the structure and way to calculate the Hash Sub-Field as defined in this Section.
The value of the Reserved Sub-Field is reserved for future versions of Server Side Cookie construction. On construction it SHOULD be set to zero octets. On Server Cookie verification the server MUST NOT enforce those fields to be zero and the Hash should be computed with the received value as described in Section 4.4.
The Timestamp value prevents Replay Attacks and MUST be checked by the server to be within a defined period of time. The DNS Server SHOULD allow Cookies within 1 hour period in the past and 5 minutes into the future to allow operation of low volume clients and some limited time skew between the DNS servers in the anycast.
The Timestamp value specifies a date and time in the form of a 32-bit unsigned number of seconds elapsed since 1 January 1970 00:00:00 UTC, ignoring leap seconds, in network byte order. All comparisons involving these fields MUST use "Serial number arithmetic", as defined in [RFC1982]
The DNS Server SHOULD generate a new Server Cookie at least if the received Server Cookie from the Client is more than half an hour old.
It's important that all the DNS servers use the same algorithm for computing the Server Cookie. This document defines the Version 1 of the Server Side algorithm to be:
Hash = SipHash2.4(
Client Cookie | Version | Reserved | Timestamp | Client-IP,
Server Secret )
Notice that Client-IP is used for hash generation even though it's not included in the cookie value itself. Client-IP can be either 4 bytes for IPv4 or 16 bytes for IPv6.
The Server Secret MUST be configurable to make sure that servers in an anycast network return consistent results.
All servers in an anycast group must be able to verify the Server Cookies constructed by all other servers in that anycast set at all times. Therefore it is vital that the Server Secret is shared among all servers before it us used to generate Server Cookies.
Also, to maximize maintaining established relationships between clients and servers, an old Server Secret should be valid for verification purposes for a specific period.
To facilitate this, deployment of a new Server Secret MUST be done in three stages:
[SipHash-2.4] is a pseudorandom function suitable as Message Authentication Code. This document REQUIRES compliant DNS Server to use SipHash-2.4 as a mandatory and default algorithm for DNS Cookies to ensure interoperability between the DNS Implementations.
The construction method and pseudorandom function used in calculating and verifying the Server Cookies are determined by the initial version byte and by the length of the Server Cookie. Additional pseudorandom or construction algorithms for Server Cookies might be added in the future.
IANA is requested to create a registry on the "Domain Name System (DNS) Parameters" IANA web page as follows:
Registry Name: DNS Server Cookie Methods
Assignment Policy: Expert Review
Reference: [this document], [RFC7873]
Note: Server Cookie method (construction and pseudorandom algorithm) are determined by the Version in the first byte of the Cookie and by the Cookie size. Server Cookie size is limited to the inclusive range of 8 to 32 bytes.
Implementation recommendations for Cookie Algorithms [DNSCOOKIE-IANA]:
| Version | Size | Method |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 8-32 | reserved |
| 1 | 8-15 | unassiged |
| 1 | 16 | SipHash-2.4 [this document] Section 4 |
| 1 | 17-32 | unassigned |
| 2-239 | 8-32 | unassigned |
| 240-254 | 8-32 | private use |
| 255 | 8-32 | reserved |
| [RFC1982] | Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Serial Number Arithmetic", RFC 1982, DOI 10.17487/RFC1982, August 1996. |
| [RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997. |
| [RFC7873] | Eastlake 3rd, D. and M. Andrews, "Domain Name System (DNS) Cookies", RFC 7873, DOI 10.17487/RFC7873, May 2016. |
| [RFC8174] | Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017. |
| [SipHash-2.4] | Aumasson, J. and D. Bernstein, "SipHash: a fast short-input PRF", 2012. |
| [FNV] | Fowler, G., Noll, L., Vo, K., Eastlake, D. and T. Hansen, "The FNV Non-Cryptographic Hash Algorithm" |
| [RFC6234] | Eastlake 3rd, D. and T. Hansen, "US Secure Hash Algorithms (SHA and SHA-based HMAC and HKDF)", RFC 6234, DOI 10.17487/RFC6234, May 2011. |
Thanks to Witold Krecicki and Pieter Lexis for valuable input, suggestions and text and above all for implementing a prototype of an interoperable DNS Cookie in Bind9, Knot and PowerDNS during the hackathon of IETF104 in Prague. Thanks for valuable input and suggestions go to Ralph Dolmans, Bob Harold, Daniel Salzman, Martin Hoffmann, Mukund Sivaraman, Petr Spacek, Loganaden Velvindron, Bob Harold
A resolver (client) sending from IPv4 address 198.51.100.100, sends a query for example.com to an authoritative server listening on 192.0.2.53 from which it has not yet learned the server cookie.
The DNS requests and replies shown in this Appendix, are in a "dig" like format. The content of the DNS COOKIE Option is shown in hexadecimal format after ; COOKIE:.
;; Sending: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 57406 ;; flags:; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: 2464c4abcf10c957 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.com. IN A ;; QUERY SIZE: 52
The authoritative nameserver (server) is configured with the following secret: e5e973e5a6b2a43f48e7dc849e37bfcf (as hex data).
It receives the query at Wed Jun 5 10:53:05 UTC 2019.
The content of the DNS COOKIE Option that the server will return is shown below in hexadecimal format after ; COOKIE:
;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 57406 ;; flags: qr aa; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: 2464c4abcf10c957010000005cf79f111f8130c3eee29480 (good) ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: example.com. 86400 IN A 192.0.2.34 ;; Query time: 6 msec ;; SERVER: 192.0.2.53#53(192.0.2.53) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 5 10:53:05 UTC 2019 ;; MSD SIZE rcvd: 84
40 minutes later, the same resolver (client) queries the same server for for example.org :
;; Sending: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50939 ;; flags:; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: 2464c4abcf10c957010000005cf79f111f8130c3eee29480 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.org. IN A ;; QUERY SIZE: 52
The authoritative nameserver (server) now generates a new Server Cookie. The server SHOULD do this because it can see the Server Cookie send by the client is older than half an hour Section 4.3, but it is also fine for a server to generate a new Server Cookie sooner, or even for every answer.
;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50939 ;; flags: qr aa; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: 2464c4abcf10c957010000005cf7a871d4a564a1442aca77 (good) ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.org. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: example.org. 86400 IN A 192.0.2.34 ;; Query time: 6 msec ;; SERVER: 192.0.2.53#53(192.0.2.53) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 5 11:33:05 UTC 2019 ;; MSD SIZE rcvd: 84
Another resolver (client) with IPv4 address 203.0.113.203 sends a request to the same server with a valid Server Cookie that it learned before (at Wed Jun 5 09:46:25 UTC 2019). Note that the Server Cookie has Reserved bytes set, but is still valid with the configured secret; the Hash part is calculated taking along the Reserved bytes.
;; Sending: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34736 ;; flags:; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: fc93fc62807ddb8601abcdef5cf78f71a314227b6679ebf5 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.com. IN A ;; QUERY SIZE: 52
The authoritative nameserver (server) replies with a freshly generated Server Cookie for this client conformant with this specification; so with the Reserved bits set to zero.
;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34736 ;; flags: qr aa; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: fc93fc62807ddb86010000005cf7a9acf73a7810aca2381e (good) ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: example.com. 86400 IN A 192.0.2.34 ;; Query time: 6 msec ;; SERVER: 192.0.2.53#53(192.0.2.53) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 5 11:38:20 UTC 2019 ;; MSD SIZE rcvd: 84
The query below is from a client with IPv6 address 2001:db8:220:1:59de:d0f4:8769:82b8 to a server with IPv6 address 2001:db8:8f::53. The client has learned a valid Server Cookie before when the Server had secret: dd3bdf9344b678b185a6f5cb60fca715. The server now uses a new secret, but it can still validate the Server Cookie provided by the client as the old secret has not expired yet.
;; Sending: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6774 ;; flags:; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: 22681ab97d52c298010000005cf7c57926556bd0934c72f8 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.net. IN A ;; QUERY SIZE: 52
The authoritative nameserver (server) replies with a freshly generated server cookie for this client with its new secret: 445536bcd2513298075a5d379663c962
;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6774 ;; flags: qr aa; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ; COOKIE: 22681ab97d52c298010000005cf7c609a6bb79d16625507a (good) ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;example.net. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: example.net. 86400 IN A 192.0.2.34 ;; Query time: 6 msec ;; SERVER: 2001:db8:8f::53#53(2001:db8:8f::53) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 5 13:36:57 UTC 2019 ;; MSD SIZE rcvd: 84