[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-ietf-krb-wg-pkinit-alg-agility) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 RFC 8636

Kitten Working Group                                L. Hornquist Astrand
Internet-Draft                                                Apple, Inc
Updates: 4556 (if approved)                                       L. Zhu
Intended status: Standards Track                      Oracle Corporation
Expires: October 20, 2019                                   M. Wasserman
                                                       Painless Security
                                                               G. Hudson
                                                                     MIT
                                                          April 18, 2019


                        PKINIT Algorithm Agility
                draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility-07

Abstract

   This document updates the Public Key Cryptography for Initial
   Authentication in Kerberos standard (PKINIT) [RFC4556], to remove
   protocol structures tied to specific cryptographic algorithms.  The
   PKINIT key derivation function is made negotiable, and the digest
   algorithms for signing the pre-authentication data and the client's
   X.509 certificates are made discoverable.

   These changes provide preemptive protection against vulnerabilities
   discovered in the future against any specific cryptographic
   algorithm, and allow incremental deployment of newer algorithms.

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 October 20, 2019.








Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008.  The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  paChecksum Agility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  CMS Digest Algorithm Agility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  X.509 Certificate Signer Algorithm Agility  . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  KDF agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Interoperability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Test vectors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     8.1.  Common Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     8.2.  Test Vector for SHA-1, enctype 18 . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       8.2.1.  Specific Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       8.2.2.  Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     8.3.  Test Vector for SHA-256, enctype  . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       8.3.1.  Specific Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       8.3.2.  Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     8.4.  Test Vector for SHA-512, enctype  . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       8.4.1.  Specific Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       8.4.2.  Outputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14



Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   12. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     12.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     12.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   Appendix A.  PKINIT ASN.1 Module  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20

1.  Introduction

   The Public Key Cryptography for Initial Authentication in Kerberos
   (PKINIT) standard [RFC4556] defines several protocol structures that
   are either tied to SHA-1 [RFC6234], or do not support negotiation or
   discovery, but are instead based on local policy:

   o  The checksum algorithm in the authentication request is hardwired
      to use SHA-1.

   o  The acceptable digest algorithms for signing the authentication
      data are not discoverable.

   o  The key derivation function in Section 3.2.3.1 of [RFC4556] is
      hardwired to use SHA-1.

   o  The acceptable digest algorithms for signing the client X.509
      certificates are not discoverable.

   In August 2004, Xiaoyun Wang's research group reported MD4 [RFC6150]
   collisions generated using hand calculation [WANG04], alongside
   attacks on later hash function designs in the MD4, MD5 [RFC1321] and
   SHA [RFC6234] family.  These attacks and their consequences are
   discussed in [RFC6194].  These discoveries challenged the security of
   protocols relying on the collision resistance properties of these
   hashes.

   The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) called for actions to
   update existing protocols to provide crypto algorithm agility so that
   protocols support multiple cryptographic algorithms (including hash
   functions) and provide clean, tested transition strategies between
   algorithms, as recommended by BCP 201 [RFC7696].

   To address these concerns, new key derivation functions (KDFs),
   identified by object identifiers, are defined.  The PKINIT client
   provides a list of KDFs in the request and the Key Distribution
   Center (KDC) picks one in the response, thus a mutually-supported KDF
   is negotiated.





Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   Furthermore, structures are defined to allow the client to discover
   the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) [RFC5652] digest algorithms
   supported by the KDC for signing the pre-authentication data and
   signing the client X.509 certificate.

2.  Requirements Notation

   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.  paChecksum Agility

   The paChecksum defined in Section 3.2.1 of [RFC4556] provides a
   cryptographic binding between the client's pre-authentication data
   and the corresponding Kerberos request body.  This also prevents the
   KDC-REQ body from being tampered with.  SHA-1 is the only allowed
   checksum algorithm defined in [RFC4556].  This facility relies on the
   collision resistance properties of the SHA-1 checksum [RFC6234].

   When the reply key delivery mechanism is based on public key
   encryption as described in Section 3.2.3.2 of [RFC4556], the
   asChecksum in the KDC reply provides the binding between the pre-
   authentication and the ticket request and response messages, and
   integrity protection for the unauthenticated clear text in these
   messages.  However, if the reply key delivery mechanism is based on
   the Diffie-Hellman key agreement as described in Section 3.2.3.1 of
   [RFC4556], the security provided by using SHA-1 in the paChecksum is
   weak, and nothing else cryptographically binds the AS request to the
   ticket response.  In this case, the new KDF selected by the KDC as
   described in Section 6 provides the cryptographic binding and
   integrity protection.

4.  CMS Digest Algorithm Agility

   Section 3.2.2 of [RFC4556] is updated to add optional typed data to
   the KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_SIGNED_DATA_NOT_ACCEPTED error.  When a KDC
   implementation conforming to this specification returns this error
   code, it MAY include in a list of supported CMS types signifying the
   digest algorithms supported by the KDC, in the decreasing preference
   order.  This is accomplished by including a
   TD_CMS_DATA_DIGEST_ALGORITHMS typed data element in the error data.


   td-cms-digest-algorithms INTEGER ::= 111




Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   The corresponding data for the TD_CMS_DATA_DIGEST_ALGORITHMS contains
   the ASN.1 Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER) [X680] [X690] encoded
   TD-CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA structure defined as follows:

   TD-CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA ::= SEQUENCE OF
       AlgorithmIdentifier
           -- Contains the list of CMS algorithm [RFC5652]
           -- identifiers indicating the digest algorithms
           -- acceptable to the KDC for signing CMS data in
           -- the order of decreasing preference.


   The algorithm identifiers in the TD-CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS identifiy
   digest algorithms supported by the KDC.

   This information sent by the KDC via TD_CMS_DATA_DIGEST_ALGORITHMS
   can facilitate trouble-shooting when none of the digest algorithms
   supported by the client is supported by the KDC.

5.  X.509 Certificate Signer Algorithm Agility

   Section 3.2.2 of [RFC4556] is updated to add optional typed data to
   the KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_CERT_NOT_ACCEPTED error.  When a KDC conforming
   to this specification returns this error, it MAY send a list of
   digest algorithms acceptable to the KDC for use by the Certificate
   Authority (CA) in signing the client's X.509 certificate, in the
   decreasing preference order.  This is accomplished by including a
   TD_CERT_DIGEST_ALGORITHMS typed data element in the error data.  The
   corresponding data contains the ASN.1 DER encoding of the structure
   TD-CERT-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA defined as follows:





















Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   td-cert-digest-algorithms INTEGER ::= 112

   TD-CERT-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA ::= SEQUENCE {
           allowedAlgorithms [0] SEQUENCE OF AlgorithmIdentifier,
                      -- Contains the list of CMS algorithm [RFC5652]
                      -- identifiers indicating the digest algorithms
                      -- that are used by the CA to sign the client's
                      -- X.509 certificate and are acceptable to the KDC
                      -- in the process of validating the client's X.509
                      -- certificate, in the order of decreasing
                      -- preference.
           rejectedAlgorithm [1] AlgorithmIdentifier OPTIONAL,
                      -- This identifies the digest algorithm that was
                      -- used to sign the client's X.509 certificate and
                      -- has been rejected by the KDC in the process of
                      -- validating the client's X.509 certificate
                      -- [RFC5280].
           ...
   }


   The KDC fills in the allowedAlgorithm field with the list of
   algorithm [RFC5652] identifiers indicating digest algorithms that are
   used by the CA to sign the client's X.509 certificate and are
   acceptable to the KDC in the process of validating the client's X.509
   certificate, in the order of decreasing preference.  The
   rejectedAlgorithm field identifies the signing algorithm for use in
   signing the client's X.509 certificate that has been rejected by the
   KDC in the process of validating the client's certificate [RFC5280].

6.  KDF agility

   Section 3.2.3.1 of [RFC4556] is updated to define additional Key
   Derivation Functions (KDFs) to derive a Kerberos protocol key based
   on the secret value generated by the Diffie-Hellman key exchange.
   Section 3.2.1 of [RFC4556] is updated to add a new field to the
   AuthPack structure to indicate which new KDFs are supported by the
   client.  Section 3.2.3 of [RFC4556] is updated to add a new field to
   the DHRepInfo structure to indicate which KDF is selected by the KDC.

   The KDF algorithm described in this document (based on [SP80056A])
   can be implemented using any cryptographic hash function.

   A new KDF for PKINIT usage is identified by an object identifier.
   The following KDF object identifiers are defined:






Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   id-pkinit OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=
            { iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
              security(5) kerberosv5(2) pkinit (3) }
       -- Defined in RFC 4556 and quoted here for the reader.

   id-pkinit-kdf OBJECT IDENTIFIER      ::= { id-pkinit kdf(6) }
       -- PKINIT KDFs

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha1 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha1(1) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-1

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha256(2) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-256

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha512(3) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-512

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha384(4) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-384


   Where id-pkinit is defined in [RFC4556].  All key derivation
   functions specified above use the one-step key derivation method
   described in Section 5.8.2.1 of [SP80056A], using the ASN.1 format
   for FixedInfo, and Section 4.1 of [SP80056C], using option 1 for the
   auxiliary function H.  id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha1 uses SHA-1 [RFC6234] as
   the hash function.  id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha256, id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha356,
   and id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha512 use SHA-256 [RFC6234], SHA-384 ([RFC6234]
   and SHA-512 [RFC6234] respectively.

   To name the input parameters, an abbreviated version of the key
   derivation method is described below.

   1.  reps = ceiling(L/H_outputBits)

   2.  Initialize a 32-bit, big-endian bit string counter as 1.

   3.  For i = 1 to reps by 1, do the following:

       1.  Compute Hashi = H(counter || Z || OtherInfo).

       2.  Increment counter (not to exceed 2^32-1)





Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   4.  Set key_material = Hash1 || Hash2 || ... so that the length of
       key_material is L bits, truncating the last block as necessary.

   5.  The above KDF produces a bit string of length L in bits as the
       keying material.  The AS reply key is the output of random-to-
       key() [RFC3961] using that keying material as the input.

   The input parameters for these KDFs are provided as follows:

   o  H_outputBits is 160 bits for id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha1, 256 bits for
      id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha256, 384 bits for id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha384, and
      512 bits for id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha512.

   o  max_H_inputBits is 2^64.

   o  The secret value (Z) is the shared secret value generated by the
      Diffie-Hellman exchange.  The Diffie-Hellman shared value is first
      padded with leading zeros such that the size of the secret value
      in octets is the same as that of the modulus, then represented as
      a string of octets in big-endian order.

   o  The key data length (L) is the key-generation seed length in bits
      [RFC3961] for the Authentication Service (AS) reply key.  The
      enctype of the AS reply key is selected according to [RFC4120].

   o  The algorithm identifier (algorithmID) input parameter is the
      identifier of the respective KDF.  For example, this is id-pkinit-
      kdf-ah-sha1 if the KDF uses SHA-1 as the hash.

   o  The initiator identifier (partyUInfo) contains the ASN.1 DER
      encoding of the KRB5PrincipalName [RFC4556] that identifies the
      client as specified in the AS-REQ [RFC4120] in the request.

   o  The recipient identifier (partyVInfo) contains the ASN.1 DER
      encoding of the KRB5PrincipalName [RFC4556] that identifies the
      TGS as specified in the AS-REQ [RFC4120] in the request.

   o  The supplemental public information (suppPubInfo) is the ASN.1 DER
      encoding of the structure PkinitSuppPubInfo as defined later in
      this section.

   o  The supplemental private information (suppPrivInfo) is absent.

   OtherInfo is the ASN.1 DER encoding of the following sequence:







Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   OtherInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
           algorithmID   AlgorithmIdentifier,
           partyUInfo     [0] OCTET STRING,
           partyVInfo     [1] OCTET STRING,
           suppPubInfo    [2] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL,
           suppPrivInfo   [3] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL
   }


   The structure PkinitSuppPubInfo is defined as follows:

   PkinitSuppPubInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
          enctype           [0] Int32,
              -- The enctype of the AS reply key.
          as-REQ            [1] OCTET STRING,
              -- The DER encoding of the AS-REQ [RFC4120] from the
              -- client.
          pk-as-rep         [2] OCTET STRING,
              -- The DER encoding of the PA-PK-AS-REP [RFC4556] in the
              -- KDC reply.
          ...
   }


   The PkinitSuppPubInfo structure contains mutually-known public
   information specific to the authentication exchange.  The enctype
   field is the enctype of the AS reply key as selected according to
   [RFC4120].  The as-REQ field contains the DER encoding of the type
   AS-REQ [RFC4120] in the request sent from the client to the KDC.
   Note that the as-REQ field does not include the wrapping 4 octet
   length field when TCP is used.  The pk-as-rep field contains the DER
   encoding of the type PA-PK-AS-REP [RFC4556] in the KDC reply.  The
   PkinitSuppPubInfo provides a cryptographic bindings between the pre-
   authentication data and the corresponding ticket request and
   response, thus addressing the concerns described in Section 3.

   The KDF is negotiated between the client and the KDC.  The client
   sends an unordered set of supported KDFs in the request, and the KDC
   picks one from the set in the reply.

   To accomplish this, the AuthPack structure in [RFC4556] is extended
   as follows:









Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   AuthPack ::= SEQUENCE {
          pkAuthenticator   [0] PKAuthenticator,
          clientPublicValue [1] SubjectPublicKeyInfo OPTIONAL,
          supportedCMSTypes [2] SEQUENCE OF AlgorithmIdentifier
                   OPTIONAL,
          clientDHNonce     [3] DHNonce OPTIONAL,
          ...,
          supportedKDFs     [4] SEQUENCE OF KDFAlgorithmId OPTIONAL,
              -- Contains an unordered set of KDFs supported by the
              -- client.
          ...
   }

   KDFAlgorithmId ::= SEQUENCE {
          kdf-id            [0] OBJECT IDENTIFIER,
              -- The object identifier of the KDF
          ...
   }


   The new field supportedKDFs contains an unordered set of KDFs
   supported by the client.

   The KDFAlgorithmId structure contains an object identifier that
   identifies a KDF.  The algorithm of the KDF and its parameters are
   defined by the corresponding specification of that KDF.

   The DHRepInfo structure in [RFC4556] is extended as follows:

   DHRepInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
           dhSignedData         [0] IMPLICIT OCTET STRING,
           serverDHNonce        [1] DHNonce OPTIONAL,
           ...,
           kdf                  [2] KDFAlgorithmId OPTIONAL,
               -- The KDF picked by the KDC.
           ...
   }


   The new field kdf in the extended DHRepInfo structure identifies the
   KDF picked by the KDC.  If the supportedKDFs field is present in the
   request, a KDC conforming to this specification MUST choose one of
   the KDFs supported by the client and indicate its selection in the
   kdf field in the reply.  If the supportedKDFs field is absent in the
   request, the KDC MUST omit the kdf field in the reply and use the key
   derivation function from Section 3.2.3.1 of [RFC4556].  If none of
   the KDFs supported by the client is acceptable to the KDC, the KDC
   MUST reply with the new error code KDC_ERR_NO_ACCEPTABLE_KDF:



Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   o  KDC_ERR_NO_ACCEPTABLE_KDF 100

   If the client fills the supportedKDFs field in the request, but the
   kdf field in the reply is not present, the client can deduce that the
   KDC is not updated to conform with this specification, or that the
   exchange was subjected to a downgrade attack.  It is a matter of
   local policy on the client whether to reject the reply when the kdf
   field is absent in the reply; if compatibility with non-updated KDCs
   is not a concern, the reply should be rejected.

   Implementations conforming to this specification MUST support id-
   pkinit-kdf-ah-sha256.

7.  Interoperability

   An old client interoperating with a new KDC will not recognize a TD-
   CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA element in a
   KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_SIGNED_DATA_NOT_ACCEPTED error, or a TD-CERT-
   DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA element in a
   KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_CERT_NOT_ACCEPTED error.  Because the error data is
   encoded as typed data, the client will ignore the unrecognized
   elements.

   An old KDC interoperating with a new client will not include a TD-
   CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA element in a
   KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_SIGNED_DATA_NOT_ACCEPTED error, or a TD-CERT-
   DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA element in a
   KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_CERT_NOT_ACCEPTED error.  To the client this
   appears just as if a new KDC elected not to include a list of digest
   algorithms.

   An old client interoperating with a new KDC will not include the
   supportedKDFs field in the request.  The KDC MUST omit the kdf field
   in the reply and use the [RFC4556] KDF as expected by the client, or
   reject the request if local policy forbids use of the old KDF.

   A new client interoperating with an old KDC will include the
   supportedKDFs field in the request; this field will be ignored as an
   unknown extension by the KDC.  The KDC will omit the kdf field in the
   reply and will use the [RFC4556] KDF.  The client can deduce from the
   omitted kdf field that the KDC is not updated to conform to this
   specification, or that the exchange was subjected to a downgrade
   attack.  The client MUST use the [RFC4556] KDF, or reject the reply
   if local policy forbids the use of the old KDF.







Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


8.  Test vectors

   This section contains test vectors for the KDF defined above.

8.1.  Common Inputs

Z: Length = 256 bytes, Hex Representation = (All Zeros)
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000000000 00000000 00000000 00000000

client: Length = 9 bytes, ASCII Representation = lha@SU.SE

server: Length = 18 bytes, ASCII Representation = krbtgt/SU.SE@SU.SE

as-req: Length = 10 bytes, Hex Representation =
AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAA

pk-as-rep:  Length = 9 bytes, Hex Representation =
BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BB

ticket: Length =  55 bytes, Hex Representation =
61353033 A0030201 05A1071B 0553552E 5345A210 300EA003 020101A1 0730051B
036C6861 A311300F A0030201 12A20804 0668656A 68656A


8.2.  Test Vector for SHA-1, enctype 18

8.2.1.  Specific Inputs

   algorithm-id: (id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha1) Length = 8 bytes, Hex
   Representation = 2B060105 02030601

   enctype: (aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96) Length = 1 byte, Decimal
   Representation = 18


8.2.2.  Outputs








Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


 key-material: Length = 32 bytes, Hex Representation =
 E6AB38C9 413E035B B079201E D0B6B73D 8D49A814 A737C04E E6649614 206F73AD

 key: Length = 32 bytes, Hex Representation =
 E6AB38C9 413E035B B079201E D0B6B73D 8D49A814 A737C04E E6649614 206F73AD


8.3.  Test Vector for SHA-256, enctype

8.3.1.  Specific Inputs

   algorithm-id: (id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha256) Length = 8 bytes, Hex
   Representation = 2B060105 02030602

   enctype: (aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96) Length = 1 byte, Decimal
   Representation = 18


8.3.2.  Outputs

 key-material: Length = 32 bytes, Hex Representation =
 77EF4E48 C420AE3F EC75109D 7981697E ED5D295C 90C62564 F7BFD101 FA9bC1D5

 key: Length = 32 bytes, Hex Representation =
 77EF4E48 C420AE3F EC75109D 7981697E ED5D295C 90C62564 F7BFD101 FA9bC1D5


8.4.  Test Vector for SHA-512, enctype

8.4.1.  Specific Inputs

algorithm-id: (id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha512) Length = 8 bytes, Hex
Representation = 2B060105 02030603

enctype: (des3-cbc-sha1-kd) Length = 1 byte, Decimal Representation = 16


8.4.2.  Outputs

   key-material: Length = 24 bytes, Hex Representation =
   D3C78A79 D65213EF E9A826F7 5DFB01F7 2362FB16 FB01DAD6

   key: Length = 32 bytes, Hex Representation =
   D3C78A79 D65213EF E9A826F7 5DFB01F7 2362FB16 FB01DAD6







Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


9.  Security Considerations

   This document describes negotiation of checksum types, key derivation
   functions and other cryptographic functions.  If a given negotiation
   is unauthenticated, care must be taken to accept only secure values;
   to do otherwise allows an active attacker to perform a downgrade
   attack.

   The discovery method described in Section 4 uses a Kerberos error
   message, which is unauthenticated in a typical exchange.  An attacker
   may attempt to downgrade a client to a weaker CMS type by forging a
   KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_SIGNED_DATA_NOT_ACCEPTED error.  It is a matter of
   local policy whether a client accepts a downgrade to a weaker CMS
   type.  A client may reasonably assume that the real KDC implements
   all hash functions used in the client's X.509 certificate, and refuse
   attempts to downgrade to weaker hash functions.

   The discovery method described in Section 5 also uses a Kerberos
   error message.  An attacker may attempt to downgrade a client to a
   certificate using a weaker signing algorithm by forging a
   KDC_ERR_DIGEST_IN_CERT_NOT_ACCEPTED error.  It is a matter of local
   policy whether a client accepts a downgrade to a weaker certificate.
   This attack is only possible if the client device possesses multiple
   client certificates of varying strength.

   In the KDF negotiation method described in Section 6, the client
   supportedKDFs value is protected by the signature on the
   signedAuthPack field in the request.  If this signature algorithm is
   weak to collision attacks, an attacker may attempt to downgrade the
   negotiation by substituting an AuthPack with a different or absent
   supportedKDFs value, using a PKINIT freshness token [RFC8070] to
   partially control the legitimate AuthPack value.  A client performing
   anonymous PKINIT [RFC8062] does not sign the AuthPack, so an attacker
   can easily remove the supportedKDFs value in this case.  Finally, the
   kdf field in the DHRepInfo of the KDC response is unauthenticated, so
   could be altered or removed by an attacker, although this alteration
   will likely result in a decryption failure by the client rather than
   a successful downgrade.  It is a matter of local policy whether a
   client accepts a downgrade to the old KDF.

   The paChecksum field, which binds the client pre-authentication data
   to the Kerberos request body, remains fixed at SHA-1.  If an attacker
   substitutes a different request body using an attack against SHA-1 (a
   second preimage attack is likely required as the attacker does not
   control any part of the legitimate request body), the KDC will not
   detect the substitution.  Instead, if a new KDF is negotiated, the
   client will detect the substitution by failing to decrypt the reply.




Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


10.  Acknowledgements

   Jeffery Hutzelman, Shawn Emery, Tim Polk, Kelley Burgin, Ben Kaduk,
   Scott Bradner, and Eric Rescorla reviewed the document and provided
   suggestions for improvements.

11.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to update the following registrations in the
   Kerberos Pre-authentication and Typed Data Registry created by
   section 7.1 of RFC 6113 to refer to this specification.  These values
   were reserved for this specification in the initial registrations.


               TD-CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS   111  [ALG-AGILITY]
               TD-CERT-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS  112  [ALG-AGILITY]


12.  References

12.1.  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>.

   [RFC3961]  Raeburn, K., "Encryption and Checksum Specifications for
              Kerberos 5", RFC 3961, DOI 10.17487/RFC3961, February
              2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3961>.

   [RFC4120]  Neuman, C., Yu, T., Hartman, S., and K. Raeburn, "The
              Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4120, July 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4120>.

   [RFC4556]  Zhu, L. and B. Tung, "Public Key Cryptography for Initial
              Authentication in Kerberos (PKINIT)", RFC 4556,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4556, June 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4556>.

   [RFC5280]  Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
              Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
              Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
              (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.





Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   [RFC5652]  Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", STD 70,
              RFC 5652, DOI 10.17487/RFC5652, September 2009,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5652>.

   [RFC6234]  Eastlake 3rd, D. and T. Hansen, "US Secure Hash Algorithms
              (SHA and SHA-based HMAC and HKDF)", RFC 6234,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6234, May 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6234>.

   [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>.

   [SP80056A]
              Barker, E., Chen, L., Roginsky, A., Vassilev, A., and R.
              Davis, "Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key Establishment
              Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography", April
              2018.

   [SP80056C]
              Barker, E., Chen, L., and R. Davis, "Recommendation for
              Key-Derivation Methods in Key-Establishment Schemes",
              April 2018.

   [X680]     ITU, "ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (2002) | ISO/IEC
              8824-1:2002, Information technology - Abstract Syntax
              Notation One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation",
              November 2008.

   [X690]     ITU, "ITU-T Recommendation X.690 (2002) | ISO/IEC
              8825-1:2002, Information technology - ASN.1 encoding
              Rules: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER),
              Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding
              Rules (DER)", November 2008.

12.2.  Informative References

   [RFC1321]  Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC1321, April 1992,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1321>.

   [RFC6150]  Turner, S. and L. Chen, "MD4 to Historic Status",
              RFC 6150, DOI 10.17487/RFC6150, March 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6150>.







Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 16]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   [RFC6194]  Polk, T., Chen, L., Turner, S., and P. Hoffman, "Security
              Considerations for the SHA-0 and SHA-1 Message-Digest
              Algorithms", RFC 6194, DOI 10.17487/RFC6194, March 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6194>.

   [RFC7696]  Housley, R., "Guidelines for Cryptographic Algorithm
              Agility and Selecting Mandatory-to-Implement Algorithms",
              BCP 201, RFC 7696, DOI 10.17487/RFC7696, November 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7696>.

   [RFC8062]  Zhu, L., Leach, P., Hartman, S., and S. Emery, Ed.,
              "Anonymity Support for Kerberos", RFC 8062,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8062, February 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8062>.

   [RFC8070]  Short, M., Ed., Moore, S., and P. Miller, "Public Key
              Cryptography for Initial Authentication in Kerberos
              (PKINIT) Freshness Extension", RFC 8070,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8070, February 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8070>.

   [WANG04]   Wang, X., Lai, X., Fheg, D., Chen, H., and X. Yu,
              "Cryptanalysis of Hash functions MD4 and RIPEMD", August
              2004.

Appendix A.  PKINIT ASN.1 Module


   KerberosV5-PK-INIT-Agility-SPEC {
          iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
          security(5) kerberosV5(2) modules(4) pkinit(5) agility (1)
   } DEFINITIONS EXPLICIT TAGS ::= BEGIN

   IMPORTS
      AlgorithmIdentifier, SubjectPublicKeyInfo
          FROM PKIX1Explicit88 { iso (1)
            identified-organization (3) dod (6) internet (1)
            security (5) mechanisms (5) pkix (7) id-mod (0)
            id-pkix1-explicit (18) }
            -- As defined in RFC 5280.

      Ticket, Int32, Realm, EncryptionKey, Checksum
          FROM KerberosV5Spec2 { iso(1) identified-organization(3)
            dod(6) internet(1) security(5) kerberosV5(2)
            modules(4) krb5spec2(2) }
            -- as defined in RFC 4120.

      PKAuthenticator, DHNonce, id-pkinit



Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 17]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


          FROM KerberosV5-PK-INIT-SPEC {
            iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
            security(5) kerberosV5(2) modules(4) pkinit(5) };
            -- as defined in RFC 4556.

   id-pkinit-kdf OBJECT IDENTIFIER      ::= { id-pkinit kdf(6) }
       -- PKINIT KDFs

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha1 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha1(1) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-1

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha256(2) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-256

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha512(3) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-512

   id-pkinit-kdf-ah-sha384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER
       ::= { id-pkinit-kdf sha384(4) }
       -- SP800-56A ASN.1 structured hash-based KDF using SHA-384

   TD-CMS-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA ::= SEQUENCE OF
       AlgorithmIdentifier
           -- Contains the list of CMS algorithm [RFC5652]
           -- identifiers indicating the digest algorithms
           -- acceptable to the KDC for signing CMS data in
           -- the order of decreasing preference.

   TD-CERT-DIGEST-ALGORITHMS-DATA ::= SEQUENCE {
          allowedAlgorithms [0] SEQUENCE OF AlgorithmIdentifier,
              -- Contains the list of CMS algorithm [RFC5652]
              -- identifiers indicating the digest algorithms
              -- that are used by the CA to sign the client's
              -- X.509 certificate and are acceptable to the KDC
              -- in the process of validating the client's X.509
              -- certificate, in the order of decreasing
              -- preference.
          rejectedAlgorithm [1] AlgorithmIdentifier OPTIONAL,
              -- This identifies the digest algorithm that was
              -- used to sign the client's X.509 certificate and
              -- has been rejected by the KDC in the process of
              -- validating the client's X.509 certificate
              -- [RFC5280].
          ...
   }



Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 18]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


   OtherInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
           algorithmID   AlgorithmIdentifier,
           partyUInfo     [0] OCTET STRING,
           partyVInfo     [1] OCTET STRING,
           suppPubInfo    [2] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL,
           suppPrivInfo   [3] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL
   }

   PkinitSuppPubInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
          enctype           [0] Int32,
              -- The enctype of the AS reply key.
          as-REQ            [1] OCTET STRING,
              -- The DER encoding of the AS-REQ [RFC4120] from the
              -- client.
          pk-as-rep         [2] OCTET STRING,
              -- The DER encoding of the PA-PK-AS-REP [RFC4556] in the
              -- KDC reply.
          ...
   }

   AuthPack ::= SEQUENCE {
          pkAuthenticator   [0] PKAuthenticator,
          clientPublicValue [1] SubjectPublicKeyInfo OPTIONAL,
          supportedCMSTypes [2] SEQUENCE OF AlgorithmIdentifier
                   OPTIONAL,
          clientDHNonce     [3] DHNonce OPTIONAL,
          ...,
          supportedKDFs     [4] SEQUENCE OF KDFAlgorithmId OPTIONAL,
              -- Contains an unordered set of KDFs supported by the
              -- client.
          ...
   }

   KDFAlgorithmId ::= SEQUENCE {
          kdf-id            [0] OBJECT IDENTIFIER,
              -- The object identifier of the KDF
          ...
   }

   DHRepInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
          dhSignedData      [0] IMPLICIT OCTET STRING,
          serverDHNonce     [1] DHNonce OPTIONAL,
          ...,
          kdf               [2] KDFAlgorithmId OPTIONAL,
              -- The KDF picked by the KDC.
          ...
   }
   END



Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 19]


Internet-Draft          PKINIT Algorithm Agility              April 2019


Authors' Addresses

   Love Hornquist Astrand
   Apple, Inc
   Cupertino, CA
   USA

   Email: lha@apple.com


   Larry Zhu
   Oracle Corporation
   500 Oracle Parkway
   Redwood Shores, CA  94065
   USA

   Email: larryzhu@live.com


   Margaret Wasserman
   Painless Security
   356 Abbott Street
   North Andover, MA  01845
   USA

   Phone: +1 781 405-7464
   Email: mrw@painless-security.com
   URI:   http://www.painless-security.com


   Greg Hudson
   MIT

   Email: ghudson@mit.edu

















Hornquist Astrand, et alExpires October 20, 2019               [Page 20]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/