draft-josefsson-kerberos5-starttls-08.txt   draft-josefsson-kerberos5-starttls.txt 
Network Working Group S. Josefsson Network Working Group S. Josefsson
Internet-Draft SJD AB Internet-Draft SJD AB
Intended status: Informational January 22, 2010 Intended status: Informational February 2, 2010
Expires: July 26, 2010 Expires: August 6, 2010
Using Kerberos V5 over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol Using Kerberos V5 over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol
draft-josefsson-kerberos5-starttls-08 draft-josefsson-kerberos5-starttls-08
Abstract Abstract
This document specify how the Kerberos V5 protocol can be transported This document specify how the Kerberos V5 protocol can be transported
over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, to provide over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, to provide
additional security features. additional security features.
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 26, 2010. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2010.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 8, line 10 skipping to change at page 8, line 10
For example: For example:
_kerberos._tls.EXAMPLE.COM. IN SRV 0 0 88 kdc1.example.com. _kerberos._tls.EXAMPLE.COM. IN SRV 0 0 88 kdc1.example.com.
_kerberos._tls.EXAMPLE.COM. IN SRV 1 0 88 kdc2.example.com. _kerberos._tls.EXAMPLE.COM. IN SRV 1 0 88 kdc2.example.com.
5. Server Certificates 5. Server Certificates
The TLS protocol may be used in a mode that provides server The TLS protocol may be used in a mode that provides server
authentication using, for example, X.509 and OpenPGP. authentication using, for example, X.509 and OpenPGP.
The Kerberos V5 STARTTLS protocol do not require clients to verify A goal for the protocol described in this memo is that it should be
the server certificate. The goal is that support for TLS in Kerberos as easy to implement and deploy on clients as support for UDP/TCP.
V5 clients should be as easy to implement and deploy as support for Since many client environments do not have secure long-term storage
UDP/TCP. Use of TLS, even without server certificate validation, (and server certificate validation requires some form of long-term
protects against some attacks that Kerberos V5 over UDP/TCP do not. storage), the Kerberos V5 STARTTLS protocol does not require clients
(For example, passive network sniffing between the user and the KDC to verify server certificates. If server certification had been
to track which Kerberos services are used by the user.) To require required, then environments with constrained clients such as those
server certificates to be validated at all times would lead to mentioned would be forced to disable TLS; this would arguably be
disabling of TLS when clients are unable to validate server worse than TLS without server certificate validation as use of TLS,
certificates, and this may have worse security properties than using even without server certificate validation, protects against some
TLS and not validate the server certificate would have. attacks that Kerberos V5 over UDP/TCP do not. For example, even
without server certificate validation, TLS does protect against
passive network sniffing aimed at tracking Kerberos service usage by
a given client.
Many client environments do not have secure long-term storage, which Note however that use of TLS without server certificate verification
is required to validate certificates. This makes it impossible to opens up for a range of active attacks such as man-in-the-middle.
use server certificate validation on a large number of client
systems.
When clients have the ability, they MUST validate the server When clients have the ability, they MUST validate the server
certificate. For this reason, if a KDC presents a X.509 server certificate. For this reason, if a KDC presents a X.509 server
certificate over TLS, it MUST contain an otherName Subject certificate over TLS, it MUST contain an otherName Subject
Alternative Name (SAN) identified using a type-id of id-krb5starttls- Alternative Name (SAN) identified using a type-id of id-krb5starttls-
san. The intention is to bind the server certificate to the Kerberos san. The intention is to bind the server certificate to the Kerberos
realm for the purpose of using Kerberos V5 STARTTLS. The value field realm for the purpose of using Kerberos V5 STARTTLS. The value field
of the otherName should contain the realm as the "Realm" ASN.1 type. of the otherName should contain the realm as the "Realm" ASN.1 type.
id-krb5starttls-san OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= id-krb5starttls-san OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=
 End of changes. 4 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 19 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.29, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/