Internet DRAFT - draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-rsc
draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-rsc
Network Working Group J. Snijders
Internet-Draft Fastly
Intended status: Informational February 20, 2021
Expires: August 24, 2021
RPKI Signed Checklists
draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rpki-rsc-03
Abstract
This document defines a Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) profile
for a general purpose listing of checksums (a 'checklist'), for use
with the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). The objective is
to allow an attestation, in the form of a listing of one or more
checksums of arbitrary digital objects (files), to be signed "with
resources", and for validation to provide a means to confirm a
specific Internet Resource Holder produced the signed checklist. The
profile is intended to provide for the signing of a checksum listing
with an arbitrary set of Internet Number Resources.
Requirements Language
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.
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 August 24, 2021.
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. RSC Profile and Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. The RSC ContentType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. The RSC eContent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1. version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. digestAlgorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.4. checkList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. RSC Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION 6
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. OID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. File Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.3. Media Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
This document defines a Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) [RFC5652]
profile for a general purpose listing of checksums (a 'checklist'),
for use with the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) [RFC6480].
The objective is to allow an attestation, in the form of a listing of
one or more checksums of arbitrary files, to be signed "with
resources", and for validation to provide a means to confirm a given
Internet Resource Holder produced the RPKI Signed Checklist (RSC).
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
The profile is intended to provide for the signing of a checksum
listing with an arbitrary set of Internet Number Resources.
RSC files are expected to facilitate Bring Your Own IP (BYOIP)
authentication, inter-domain interconnection provisioning, and
resource holdership verification processes.
The RSC concept borrows heavily from RTA [I-D.ietf-sidrops-rpki-rta],
Manifests [RFC6486], and OpenBSD's [signify] utility. The main
difference between RSC and RTA is that an RTA enables multiple
signers to attest a single anonymous digital object through a
checksum of its content, while an RSC allows a single signer to
attest the checksums of multiple named digital objects. This
difference is expected to represent a simplification for implementers
and operators.
2. RSC Profile and Distribution
RSC follows the Signed Object Template for the RPKI [RFC6488] with
one exception. Because RSCs MUST NOT be distributed through the
global RPKI repository system, the Subject Information Access (SIA)
extension is omitted from the RSC's X.509 EE certificate.
What constitutes suitable transport for RSC files is deliberately
unspecified. It might be a USB stick, a web interface secured with
conventional HTTPS, PGP-signed email, a T-shirt printed with a QR
code, or a carrier pigeon.
3. The RSC ContentType
The ContentType for an RSC is defined as rpkiSignedChecklist, and has
the numerical value of 1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.1.TBD.
This OID MUST appear both within the eContentType in the
encapContentInfo object as well as the ContentType signed attribute
in the signerInfo object (see [RFC6488]).
4. The RSC eContent
The content of an RSC indicates that an a checklist for arbitrary
named digital objects has been signed "with resources". An RSC is
formally defined as:
RpkiSignedChecklist-2021
{ iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549)
pkcs(1) pkcs9(9) smime(16) mod(0) TBD }
DEFINITIONS EXPLICIT TAGS ::=
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
BEGIN
IMPORTS
CONTENT-TYPE, Digest, DigestAlgorithmIdentifier
FROM CryptographicMessageSyntax-2009 -- in [RFC5911]
{ iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1)
pkcs-9(9) smime(16) modules(0) id-mod-cms-2004-02(41) }
ASIdOrRange, IPAddressFamily
FROM IPAddrAndASCertExtn -- in [RFC3779]
{ iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) mod(0)
id-mod-ip-addr-and-as-ident(30) } ;
ct-rpkiSignedChecklist CONTENT-TYPE ::=
{ TYPE RpkiSignedChecklist IDENTIFIED BY
id-ct-signedChecklist }
id-ct-signedChecklist OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=
{ iso(1) member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1)
pkcs-9(9) id-smime(16) id-ct(1) TBD }
RpkiSignedChecklist ::= SEQUENCE {
version [0] INTEGER DEFAULT 0,
resources ResourceBlock,
digestAlgorithm DigestAlgorithmIdentifier,
checkList SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF FileAndHash }
FileAndHash ::= SEQUENCE {
file IA5String OPTIONAL,
hash Digest }
ResourceBlock ::= SEQUENCE {
asID [0] AsList OPTIONAL,
ipAddrBlocks [1] IPList OPTIONAL }
-- at least one of asID or ipAddrBlocks MUST be present
( WITH COMPONENTS { ..., asID PRESENT} |
WITH COMPONENTS { ..., ipAddrBlocks PRESENT } )
AsList ::= SEQUENCE (SIZE(1..MAX)) OF ASIdOrRange
IPList ::= SEQUENCE (SIZE(1..MAX)) OF IPAddressFamily
END
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
4.1. version
The version number of the RpkiSignedChecklist MUST be 0.
4.2. resources
The resources contained here are the resources used to mark the
attestation, and MUST match the set of resources listed by the EE
certificate carried in the CMS certificates field.
4.3. digestAlgorithm
The digest algorithm used to create the message digest of the
attested digital object. This algorithm MUST be a hashing algorithm
defined in [RFC7935].
4.4. checkList
This field is a sequence of FileAndHash objects. There is one
FileAndHash entry for each arbitrary object referenced from the RSC.
Each FileAndHash is an ordered pair consisting an optional name of
the file containing the object, and the message digest of the digital
object.
5. Operational Considerations
When working with objects of a plain-text nature (ASCII, UTF-8, HTML,
Javascript, XML, etc) it is RECOMMENDED to distribute such objects in
a lossless compressed form, and sign the compressed form. Wrapping
plain-text objects in a compression envelope can help make those
appear as a single octet string to any intermediate systems, which
hopefully discourages in-transit modification of the file contents.
The use of lossless compression can help avoid checksum verification
errors.
6. RSC Validation
To validate an RSC the relying party MUST perform all the validation
checks specified in [RFC6488] as well as the following additional
RSC-specific validation steps.
o The message digest of each referenced digital object, using the
digest algorithm specified in the the digestAlgorithm field, MUST
be calculated and MUST match the value given in the messageDigest
field of the associated FileAndHash.
o If a filename is present, the filename MUST NOT contain a '/'
(slash) or '\' (backslash) character.
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
7. Security Considerations
Relying parties are hereby warned that the data in a RPKI Signed
Checklist is self-asserted. These data have not been verified by the
CA that issued the CA certificate to the entity that issued the EE
certificate used to validate the Signed Checklist.
8. Implementation status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942.
The description of implementations in this section is intended to
assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort
has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist.
According to RFC 7942, "this will allow reviewers and working groups
to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
they see fit".
o A signer and validator implementation [rpki-rsc-demo] based on
perl and OpenSSL was provided by Tom Harrison from APNIC.
o A validator implementation based on OpenBSD's rpki-client is
expected to be published after IANA Early Allocation of the OIDs.
9. IANA Considerations
9.1. OID
The IANA has registered the OID for the RPKI Signed Checklist in the
registry created by [RFC6488] as follows:
Name OID Specification
---------------------------------------------------------
Checklists 1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.1.TBD [RFC-TBD]
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
9.2. File Extension
The IANA has added an item for the signed Checklist file extension to
the "RPKI Repository Name Scheme" created by [RFC6481] as follows:
Filename Extension RPKI Object Reference
-----------------------------------------------------------
.sig Signed Checklist [RFC-TBD]
9.3. Media Type
The IANA has registered the media type application/rpki-checklist as
follows:
Type name: application
Subtype name: rpki-checklist
Required parameters: None
Optional parameters: None
Encoding considerations: binary
Security considerations: Carries an RPKI Signed Checklist
[RFC-TBD].
Interoperability considerations: None
Published specification: This document.
Applications that use this media type: RPKI operators.
Additional information:
Content: This media type is a signed object, as defined
in [RFC6488], which contains a payload of a list of
checksums as defined above in this document.
Magic number(s): None
File extension(s): .sig
Macintosh file type code(s):
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Job Snijders <job@fastly.com>
Intended usage: COMMON
Restrictions on usage: None
Author: Job Snijders <job@fastly.com>
Change controller: Job Snijders <job@fastly.com>
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[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>.
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
[RFC5652] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", STD 70,
RFC 5652, DOI 10.17487/RFC5652, September 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5652>.
[RFC6481] Huston, G., Loomans, R., and G. Michaelson, "A Profile for
Resource Certificate Repository Structure", RFC 6481,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6481, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6481>.
[RFC6486] Austein, R., Huston, G., Kent, S., and M. Lepinski,
"Manifests for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure
(RPKI)", RFC 6486, DOI 10.17487/RFC6486, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6486>.
[RFC6488] Lepinski, M., Chi, A., and S. Kent, "Signed Object
Template for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure
(RPKI)", RFC 6488, DOI 10.17487/RFC6488, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6488>.
[RFC7935] Huston, G. and G. Michaelson, Ed., "The Profile for
Algorithms and Key Sizes for Use in the Resource Public
Key Infrastructure", RFC 7935, DOI 10.17487/RFC7935,
August 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7935>.
[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>.
10.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-sidrops-rpki-rta]
Michaelson, G., Huston, G., Harrison, T., Bruijnzeels, T.,
and M. Hoffmann, "A profile for Resource Tagged
Attestations (RTAs)", draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-rta-00 (work
in progress), January 2021.
[RFC6480] Lepinski, M. and S. Kent, "An Infrastructure to Support
Secure Internet Routing", RFC 6480, DOI 10.17487/RFC6480,
February 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6480>.
[rpki-rsc-demo]
Harrison, T., "A proof-of-concept for constructing and
validating RPKI Signed Checklists (RSCs).", February 2021,
<https://github.com/APNIC-net/rpki-rsc-demo>.
[signify] Unangst, T. and M. Espie, "signify - cryptographically
sign and verify files", May 2014,
<https://man.openbsd.org/signify>.
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RPKI Signed Checklists February 2021
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank George Michaelson, Tom Harrison, Geoff
Huston, Randy Bush, Stephen Kent, Matt Lepinski, Rob Austein, Ted
Unangst, and Marc Espie for prior art. The author thanks Russ
Housley for reviewing the ASN.1 notation and providing suggestions.
The author would like to thank Nimrod Levy, Tom Harrison, Ben
Maddison, and Tim Bruijnzeels for document review and suggestions.
Author's Address
Job Snijders
Fastly
Amsterdam
Netherlands
Email: job@fastly.com
Snijders Expires August 24, 2021 [Page 9]
