4 Network Working Group E. Rescorla
5 Internet-Draft Network Resonance
6 Intended status: Informational April 23, 2007
7 Expires: October 25, 2007
10 TLS Elliptic Curve Cipher Suites with SHA-256/384 and AES Galois Counter
12 draft-ietf-tls-ecc-new-mac-00.txt
16 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
17 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
18 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
19 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
22 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
23 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
31 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
32 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
34 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
35 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
37 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 25, 2007.
41 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
45 RFC 4492 describes elliptic curve cipher suites for Transport Layer
46 Security (TLS). However, all those cipher suites use SHA-1 as their
47 MAC algorithm. This document describes eight new CipherSuites for
48 TLS/DTLS which specify stronger digest algorithms. Four use HMAC
49 with SHA-256 or SHA-384 and four use AES in Galois Counter Mode
55 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 1]
57 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
62 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
63 1.1. Conventions Used In This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
64 2. Cipher Suites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
65 2.1. HMAC-based Cipher Suites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
66 2.2. Galois Counter Mode-based Cipher Suites . . . . . . . . . . 4
67 2.3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
68 2.4. TLS Versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
69 2.5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
70 2.5.1. Downgrade Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
71 2.5.2. Perfect Forward Secrecy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
72 2.5.3. Counter Reuse with GCM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
73 2.6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
74 3. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
75 3.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
76 3.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
77 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
78 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 8
111 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 2]
113 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
118 RFC 4492 [RFC4492] describes Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) cipher
119 suites for Transport Layer Security (TLS). However, all of the RFC
120 4492 suites use HMAC-SHA1 as their MAC algorithm. Due to recent
121 analytic work on SHA-1 [Wang05], the IETF is gradually moving away
122 from SHA-1 and towards stronger hash algorithms. This document
123 specifies TLS ECC cipher suites which replace SHA-256 and SHA-384
126 TLS 1.2 [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc4346-bis], adds support for authenticated
127 encryption with additional data (AEAD) cipher modes
128 [I-D.mcgrew-auth-enc]. This document also specifies a set of ECC
129 cipher suites using one such mode, Galois Counter Mode (GCM) [GCM].
130 Another document [I-D.salowey-tls-rsa-aes-gcm], provides support for
131 GCM with other key establishment methods.
133 1.1. Conventions Used In This Document
135 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
136 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
137 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
142 This document defines 8 new cipher suites to be added to TLS. All
143 use Elliptic Curve Cryptography for key exchange and digital
144 signature, as defined in RFC 4492.
146 2.1. HMAC-based Cipher Suites
148 The first four cipher suites use AES [AES] in CBC mode with an HMAC-
151 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
152 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
153 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
154 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
156 These four cipher suites are the same as the corresponding cipher
157 suites in RFC 4492 (TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA,
158 TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA,
159 TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA, and
160 TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA) except for the hash and PRF
161 algorithms, which are SHA-256 and SHA-384 [SHS] as follows.
167 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 3]
169 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
174 TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 HMAC-SHA-256 P_SHA-256
175 TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 HMAC-SHA-384 P_SHA-384
176 TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 HMAC-SHA-256 P_SHA-256
177 TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 HMAC-SHA-384 P_SHA-384
179 2.2. Galois Counter Mode-based Cipher Suites
181 The second four cipher suites use the new authenticated encryption
182 modes defined in TLS 1.2 with AES in Galois Counter Mode (GCM) [GCM]:
184 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
185 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
186 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
187 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
189 These cipher suites use the authenticated encryption with additional
190 data algorithms AEAD_AES_128_GCM and AEAD_AES_256_GCM described in
191 [I-D.mcgrew-auth-enc]. The "nonce" input to the AEAD algorithm SHALL
192 be 12 bytes long, and constructed as follows:
199 The salt value is either the client_write_IV if the client is sending
200 or the server_write_IV if the server is sending. These IVs SHALL be
203 In DTLS, the 64-bit seq_num is the 16-bit epoch concatenated with the
206 The PRF algorithms SHALL be as follows:
208 For TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 and
209 TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 it SHALL be P_SHA-256.
211 For TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 and
212 TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 it SHALL be P_SHA-384.
214 2.3. Acknowledgements
216 This work was supported by the US Department of Defense.
223 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 4]
225 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
230 Because these cipher suites depend on features available only in TLS
231 1.2 (PRF flexibility and combined authenticated encryption cipher
232 modes), they MUST NOT be negotiated in older versions of TLS.
233 Clients MUST NOT offer these cipher suites if they do not offer TLS
234 1.2 or later. Servers which select an earlier version of TLS MUST
235 NOT select one of these cipher suites. Because TLS has no way for
236 the client to indicate that it supports TLS 1.2 but not earlier, a
237 non-compliant server might potentially negotiate TLS 1.1 or earlier
238 and select one of the cipher suites in this document. Clients MUST
239 check the TLS version and generate a fatal "illegal_parameter" alert
240 if they detect an incorrect version.
242 2.5. Security Considerations
244 The security considerations in RFC 4346 and RFC 4492 apply to this
245 document as well. The remainder of this section describes security
246 considerations specific to the cipher suites described in this
249 2.5.1. Downgrade Attack
251 TLS negotiation is only as secure as the weakest cipher suite that is
252 supported. For instance, an implementation which supports both 160-
253 bit and 256-bit elliptic curves can be subject to an active downgrade
254 attack to the 160-bit security level. An attacker who can attack
255 that can then forge the Finished handshake check and successfully
256 mount a man-in-the-middle attack.
258 2.5.2. Perfect Forward Secrecy
260 The static ECDH cipher suites specified in this document do not
261 provide perfect forward secrecy (PFS). Thus, compromise of a single
262 static key leads to potential decryption of all traffic protected
263 using that key. Implementors of this specification SHOULD provide at
264 least one ECDHE mode of operation.
266 2.5.3. Counter Reuse with GCM
268 AES-GCM is only secure if the counter is never reused. The IV
269 construction algorithm above is designed to ensure that that cannot
272 2.6. IANA Considerations
274 IANA has assigned the following values for these cipher suites:
279 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 5]
281 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
284 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
285 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
286 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
287 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
288 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
289 CipherSuite TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
290 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 = {0xXX,XX};
291 CipherSuite TLS_ECDH_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 = {0xXX,XX};
296 3.1. Normative References
298 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
299 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
301 [RFC4492] Blake-Wilson, S., Bolyard, N., Gupta, V., Hawk, C., and B.
302 Moeller, "Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) Cipher Suites
303 for Transport Layer Security (TLS)", RFC 4492, May 2006.
305 [I-D.mcgrew-auth-enc]
306 McGrew, D., "An Interface and Algorithms for Authenticated
307 Encryption", draft-mcgrew-auth-enc-02 (work in progress),
310 [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc4346-bis]
311 Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The TLS Protocol Version
312 1.2", draft-ietf-tls-rfc4346-bis-03 (work in progress),
315 [AES] National Institute of Standards and Technology,
316 "Specification for the Advanced Encryption Standard
317 (AES)", FIPS 197, November 2001.
319 [SHS] National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Secure
320 Hash Standard", FIPS 180-2, August 2002.
322 [GCM] National Institute of Standards and Technology,
323 "Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation:
324 Galois;/Counter Mode (GCM) for Confidentiality and
325 Authentication", SP 800-38D (DRAFT), April 2006.
327 [Wang05] Wang, X., Yin, Y., and H. Yu, "Finding Collisions in the
328 Full SHA-1", CRYPTO 2005, August 2005.
335 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 6]
337 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
340 3.2. Informative References
342 [I-D.salowey-tls-rsa-aes-gcm]
343 Salowey, J., "RSA based AES-GCM Cipher Suites for TLS",
344 draft-salowey-tls-rsa-aes-gcm-00 (work in progress),
352 2483 E. Bayshore #212
356 Email: ekr@networkresonance.com
391 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 7]
393 Internet-Draft TLS ECC New MAC April 2007
396 Full Copyright Statement
398 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
400 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
401 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
402 retain all their rights.
404 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
405 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
406 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
407 THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
408 OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
409 THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
410 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
413 Intellectual Property
415 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
416 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
417 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
418 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
419 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
420 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
421 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
422 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
424 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
425 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
426 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
427 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
428 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
429 http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
431 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
432 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
433 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
434 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
440 Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
441 Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
447 Rescorla Expires October 25, 2007 [Page 8]