4 Network Working Group S. Josefsson
6 Intended status: Standards Track October 21, 2006
7 Expires: April 24, 2007
10 Using Kerberos V5 over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol
11 draft-josefsson-kerberos5-starttls-02
15 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
16 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
17 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
18 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
21 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
22 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
25 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
26 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
27 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
28 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
30 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
31 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
33 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
34 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
36 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 24, 2007.
40 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
55 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 1]
57 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
62 This document specify how the Kerberos V5 protocol can be transported
63 over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, to provide
64 additional security features.
69 1. Introduction and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
70 2. Kerberos V5 STARTTLS Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
71 3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
72 4. STARTTLS aware KDC Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
73 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
74 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
75 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
76 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
77 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
78 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
79 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12
111 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 2]
113 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
116 1. Introduction and Background
118 This document describe how a Kerberos V5 [2] implementation may
119 upgrade communication between clients and Key Distribution Centers
120 (KDCs) to use the Transport Layer Security (TLS) [4] protocol.
122 The TLS protocol offer integrity and privacy protected exchanges that
123 can be authentication using X.509 certificates, OpenPGP keys [7], and
124 user name and passwords via SRP [6].
126 There are several reasons to use Kerberos V5 over TLS.
128 o Prevents downgrade attacks affecting, e.g., encryption types and
129 pre-auth data negotiation. The encryption type field in KDC-REQ,
130 and the METHOD-DATA field with the requested pre-auth types from
131 the server in KDC_ERR_PREAUTH_REQUIRED errors in KDC-REP, are sent
132 without integrity or privacy protection in Kerberos 5. This
133 allows an attacker to replace the encryption type with a
134 compromised encryption type, e.g., 56-bit DES, or request that
135 clients should use a broken pre-auth type. Since clients in
136 general cannot know the encryption types other servers support, or
137 the pre-auth types servers prefer or require, it is difficult for
138 the client to detect if there was a man-in-the-middle or if the
139 remote server simply did not support a stronger encryption type or
140 preferred another pre-auth type.
143 o Kerberos exchanges are privacy protected. Part of many Kerberos
144 packets are transfered without privacy protection (i.e.,
145 encryption). That part contains information, such as the client
146 principal name, the server principal name, the encryption types
147 supported by the client, the lifetime of tickets, etc. Revealing
148 such information is, in some threat models, considered a problem.
151 o Additional authentication against the KDC. In some situations,
152 users are equipped with smart cards with a RSA authentication key.
153 In others, users have a OpenPGP client on their desktop, with a
154 public OpenPGP key known to the server.
156 o The TLS protocol has been studied by many parties. In some threat
157 models, the designer prefer to reduce the number of protocols that
158 can hurt the overall system security if they are compromised.
161 o Explicit server authentication of the KDC to the client. In
162 traditional Kerberos 5, authentication of the KDC is proved as a
163 side effect that the KDC knows your encryption key (i.e., your
167 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 3]
169 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
174 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
175 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
176 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1].
223 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 4]
225 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
228 2. Kerberos V5 STARTTLS Extension
230 The STARTTLS extension uses the Kerberos V5 TCP extension mechanism
231 [3]. The extension uses bit #TBD in the extension bitmask.
233 The protocol is as follows. After the server has sent the 4-octet
234 value 0x00000000 to indicate support of this extension, the stream
235 will be controlled by the TLS protocol and its framing. The TLS
236 protocol is initiated by the client.
238 Typically, the client initiate the TLS handshake protocol by sending
239 a client hello, and the server responds, and the handshake continues
240 until it either succeed or fails.
242 If for any reason the handshake fails, the STARTTLS protocol will
243 also fail, and the TLS error is used as the error indication.
245 If the handshake succeeds, the Kerberos V5 authentication protocol is
246 performed within the protected TLS channel, like a normal TCP
247 Kerberos V5 exchange. In particular, this means that every Kerberos
248 V5 packet will be prefixed by a 4-octet length field, that indicate
249 the length of the Kerberos V5 packet.
279 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 5]
281 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
286 A complete packet flow for a successful AS-REQ/REP exchange protected
287 by this mechanism will be as follows. The "STARTTLS-bit" is a
288 4-octet value with only the bit allocated for this extension set.
292 [ Kerberos V5 TCP extension mechanism negotiation starts ]
294 [0x70000000 & STARTTLS-bit] -------->
298 [ TLS negotiation starts ]
301 ClientHello -------->
306 <-------- ServerHelloDone
315 [ Kerberos V5 negotiation starts ]
318 Kerberos V5 AS-REQ -------->
323 * Indicates optional or situation-dependent messages that are not
335 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 6]
337 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
340 4. STARTTLS aware KDC Discovery
342 Section 7.2.3 of Kerberos V5 [2] describe how Domain Name System
343 (DNS) SRV records [5] can be used to find the address of an KDC.
344 Using the terminology of Section 7.2.3 of RFC 4120, we define a new
345 Proto of "tls" to indicate that the particular KDC is intended to
346 support this STARTTLS extension. The Service, Realm, TTL, Class,
347 SRV, Priority, Weight, Port and Target have the same meaning as in
352 _kerberos._tls.EXAMPLE.COM. IN SRV 0 0 88 kdc1.example.com.
353 _kerberos._tls.EXAMPLE.COM. IN SRV 1 0 88 kdc2.example.com.
391 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 7]
393 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
396 5. IANA Considerations
398 The IANA is requested to allocate a bit in the "Kerberos TCP
399 Extensions" registry for the extension described in this document, as
447 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 8]
449 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
452 6. Security Considerations
454 The security considerations in Kerberos V5, TLS, and the extension
455 mechanism framework are inherited.
457 To protect against the inherent downgrade attack in the extension
458 framework, it is suggested that implementations offer a policy to
459 require that this extension is successfully negotiated. For
460 interoperability with implementations that do not support this
461 extension, it is suggested that the policy is disabled by default.
503 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 9]
505 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
510 7.1. Normative References
512 [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
513 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
515 [2] Neuman, C., Yu, T., Hartman, S., and K. Raeburn, "The Kerberos
516 Network Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120, July 2005.
518 [3] Josefsson, S., "Extended Kerberos Version 5 Key Distribution
519 Center (KDC) Exchanges Over TCP",
520 draft-ietf-krb-wg-tcp-expansion-01 (work in progress),
523 [4] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security (TLS)
524 Protocol Version 1.1", RFC 4346, April 2006.
526 [5] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
527 specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
530 7.2. Informative References
532 [6] Taylor, D., "Using SRP for TLS Authentication",
533 draft-ietf-tls-srp-12 (work in progress), June 2006.
535 [7] Mavroyanopoulos, N., "Using OpenPGP keys for TLS
536 authentication", draft-ietf-tls-openpgp-keys-10 (work in
537 progress), June 2006.
559 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 10]
561 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
569 Email: simon@josefsson.org
615 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 11]
617 Internet-Draft Protecting Kerberos V5 with TLS October 2006
620 Full Copyright Statement
622 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
624 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
625 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
626 retain all their rights.
628 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
629 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
630 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
631 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
632 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
633 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
634 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
637 Intellectual Property
639 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
640 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
641 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
642 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
643 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
644 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
645 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
646 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
648 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
649 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
650 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
651 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
652 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
653 http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
655 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
656 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
657 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
658 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
664 Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
665 Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
671 Josefsson Expires April 24, 2007 [Page 12]