Windows: Revise build of tools in lib

[heimdal.git] / doc / standardisation / draft-ietf-krb-wg-gss-cb-hash-agility-05.txt

NETWORK WORKING GROUP                                           S. Emery
Internet-Draft                                          Sun Microsystems
Updates: 4121 (if approved)                             November 3, 2008
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: May 7, 2009


        Kerberos Version 5 GSS-API Channel Binding Hash Agility
              draft-ietf-krb-wg-gss-cb-hash-agility-05.txt

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 7, 2009.

















Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 1]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


Abstract

   Currently, channel bindings are implemented using a MD5 hash in the
   Kerberos Version 5 Generic Security Services Application Programming
   Interface (GSS-API) mechanism [RFC4121].  This document updates
   RFC4121 to allow channel bindings using algorithms negotiated based
   on Kerberos crypto framework as defined in RFC3961.  In addition,
   because this update makes use of the last extensible field in the
   Kerberos client-server exchange message, extensions are defined to
   allow future protocol extensions.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Channel binding hash agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Security considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   7.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12




























Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 2]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


1.  Introduction

   With the recently discovered weaknesses in the MD5 hash algorithm
   there is a need to use stronger hash algorithms.  Kerberos Version 5
   Generic Security Services Application Programming Interface (GSS-API)
   mechanism [RFC4121] uses MD5 to calculate channel binding verifiers.
   This document specifies an update to the mechanism that allows it to
   create channel binding information based on negotiated algorithms.
   This will allow deploying new algorithms incrementally without break
   interoperability with older implementations, when new attacks arise
   in the future.








































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 3]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


2.  Conventions Used in This Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

   The term "little endian order" is used for brevity to refer to the
   least-significant-octet-first encoding, while the term "big endian
   order" is for the most-significant-octet-first encoding.










































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 4]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


3.  Channel binding hash agility

   When generating a channel binding verifier, Bnd, a hash is computed
   from the channel binding fields.  Initiators MUST populate the Bnd
   field in order to maintain interoperability with existing acceptors.
   In addition, initiators MUST populate the extension field, Exts.  All
   fields before "Exts" do not change from what is described in
   [RFC4121], they are listed for convenience.  The 0x8003 GSS checksum
   MUST have the following structure:

      Octet     Name       Description
      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      0..3      Lgth       Number of octets in Bnd field;  Represented
                            in little-endian order;  Currently contains
                            hex value 10 00 00 00 (16).
      4..19     Bnd        Channel binding information, as described in
                            section 4.1.1.2 [RFC4121].
      20..23    Flags      Four-octet context-establishment flags in
                            little-endian order as described in section
                            4.1.1.1 [RFC4121].
      24..25    DlgOpt     The delegation option identifier (=1) in
                            little-endian order [optional].  This field
                            and the next two fields are present if and
                            only if GSS_C_DELEG_FLAG is set as described
                            in section 4.1.1.1 [RFC4121].
      26..27    Dlgth      The length of the Deleg field in
                            little-endian order [optional].
      28..(n-1) Deleg      KRB_CRED message (n = Dlgth + 28) [optional].
      n..last   Exts       Extensions

      where Exts is the concatenation of zero, one or more individual
      extensions, each of which consists of, in order:

        type -- big endian order unsigned integer, 32-bits, which
                contains the type of extension
        length -- big endian order unsigned integer, 32-bits, which
                contains the length, in octets, of the extension data
                encoded as an array of octets immediately following this
                field
        data -- octet string of extension information
      in that order

      If multiple extensions are present then there MUST be at most one
      instance of a given extension type.

   When channel binding is used the Exts MUST include the following
   extension:




Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 5]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


      data-type 0x00000000

      data-value

         The output obtained by applying the Kerberos V get_mic()
         operation [RFC3961], using the sub-session key from the
         authenticator and key usage number 43, to the channel binding
         data as described in [RFC4121], section 4.1.1.2 (using get_mic
         instead of MD5).

   Initiators that are unwilling to use a MD5 hash of the channel
   bindings MUST set the Bnd field to sixteen octets of hex value FF.







































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 6]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


4.  Security considerations

   Initiators do not know if the acceptor had ignored channel bindings
   or whether it validated the MD5 hash of the channel bindings
   [RFC4121].

   Ultimately, it is up to the application whether to use channel
   binding or not.  This is dependent upon the security policy of these
   applications.










































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 7]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


5.  IANA Considerations

   The IANA is hereby requested to create a new registry of "Kerberos V
   GSS-API mechanism extension types" with four-field entries (type
   number, type name, description, and normative reference) and,
   initially, a single registration: 0x00000000, "Channel Binding MIC,"
   "Extension for the verifier of the channel bindings," <this RFC>.

   Using the guidelines for allocation as described in [RFC5226], type
   number assignments are as follows:

      0x00000000 - 0x000003FF IETF Consensus

      0x00000400 - 0xFFFFF3FF Specification Required

      0xFFFFF400 - 0xFFFFFFFF Private Use



































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 8]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


6.  Acknowledgements

   Larry Zhu helped in the review of this document overall and provided
   the suggestions of typed-data.

   Nicolas Williams and Sam Hartman suggested that the Bnd and Exts
   fields be populated simultaneously.

   Nicolas Williams and Jeffrey Hutzelman had also suggested a number
   changes to this document.









































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                  [Page 9]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


7.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3961]  Raeburn, K., "Encryption and Checksum Specifications for
              Kerberos 5", RFC 3961, February 2005.

   [RFC4120]  Neuman, C., Yu, T., Hartman, S., and K. Raeburn, "The
              Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120,
              July 2005.

   [RFC4121]  Zhu, L., Jaganathan, K., and S. Hartman, "The Kerberos
              Version 5 Generic Security Service Application Program
              Interface (GSS-API) Mechanism: Version 2", RFC 4121,
              July 2005.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                 [Page 10]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


Author's Address

   Shawn Emery
   Sun Microsystems
   500 Eldorado Blvd
   M/S UBRM05-171
   Broomfield, CO  80021
   US

   Email: shawn.emery@sun.com









































Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                 [Page 11]
\f
Internet-Draft        Channel Binding Hash Agility         November 2008


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.











Emery                      Expires May 7, 2009                 [Page 12]
\f