Internet DRAFT - draft-housley-lamps-crmf-update-algs
draft-housley-lamps-crmf-update-algs
Network Working Group R. Housley
Internet-Draft Vigil Security
Updates: 4211 (if approved) 31 October 2020
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: 4 May 2021
Algorithm Requirements Update to the Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF)
draft-housley-lamps-crmf-update-algs-01
Abstract
This document updates the cryptographic algorithm requirements for
the Password-Based Message Authentication Code in the Internet X.509
Public Key Infrastructure Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF)
specified in RFC 4211.
Status of This Memo
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 4 May 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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.
Housley Expires 4 May 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft CRMF Algorithm Requirements Update October 2020
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Password-Based Message Authentication Code . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1. One-Way Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.2. MAC Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction
This document updates the cryptographic algorithm requirements for
the Password-Based Message Authentication Code (MAC) in the Internet
X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate Request Message Format
(CRMF) [RFC4211]. The algorithms specified in [RFC4211] were
appropriate in 2005; however, these algorithms are no longer
considered the best choices. This update specifies algorithms that
are more appropriate today.
2. Terminology
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.
3. Password-Based Message Authentication Code
Section 4.4 of [RFC4211] specifies a Password-Based MAC that relies
on a one-way function to compute a symmetric key from the password
and a MAC algorithm. This section specifies algorithm requirements
for the one-way function and the MAC algorithm.
3.1. One-Way Function
Change the paragraph describing the "owf" as follows:
OLD:
owf identifies the algorithm and associated parameters used to
compute the key used in the MAC process. All implementations MUST
support SHA-1.
NEW:
Housley Expires 4 May 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft CRMF Algorithm Requirements Update October 2020
owf identifies the algorithm and associated parameters used to
compute the key used in the MAC process. All implementations MUST
support SHA-256 [SHS].
3.2. MAC Algorithm
Change the paragraph describing the "mac" as follows:
OLD:
mac identifies the algorithm and associated parameters of the MAC
function to be used. All implementations MUST support HMAC-SHA1
[HMAC]. All implementations SHOULD support DES-MAC and Triple-
DES-MAC [PKCS11].
NEW:
mac identifies the algorithm and associated parameters of the MAC
function to be used. All implementations MUST support HMAC-SHA256
[HMAC]. All implementations SHOULD support AES-GMAC [GMAC] with a
128 bit key.
{{{ Note: Has an OID already been assigned for AES-GMAC? If not, we
will need to do that too. }}}
4. IANA Considerations
This document makes no requests of the IANA.
5. Security Considerations
Cryptographic algorithms age; they become weaker with time. As new
cryptanalysis techniques are developed and computing capabilities
improve, the work required to break a particular cryptographic
algorithm will reduce, making an attack on the algorithm more
feasible for more attackers. While it is unknown how cryptoanalytic
attacks will evolve, it is certain that they will get better. It is
unknown how much better they will become or when the advances will
happen. For this reason, the algorithm requirements for CRMF are
updated by this specification.
When a Password-Based MAC is used, implementations must protect the
password and the MAC key. Compromise of either the password or the
MAC key may result in the ability of an attacker to undermine
authentication.
6. Normative References
Housley Expires 4 May 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft CRMF Algorithm Requirements Update October 2020
[AES] National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)", FIPS
Publication 197, November 2001.
[GMAC] M., D., "Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of
Operation: Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) and GMAC", NIST
Special Publication 800-38D, November 2007.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4211] Schaad, J., "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure
Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF)", RFC 4211,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4211, September 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4211>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[SHS] National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"Secure Hash Standard", FIPS Publication 180-4, August
2015.
Author's Address
Russ Housley
Vigil Security, LLC
516 Dranesville Road
Herndon, VA, 20170
United States of America
Email: housley@vigilsec.com
Housley Expires 4 May 2021 [Page 4]
