draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2538bis-03.txt | draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2538bis-04.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Network Working Group S. Josefsson | Network Working Group S. Josefsson | |||
Expires: December 12, 2005 | Expires: March 3, 2006 | |||
Storing Certificates in the Domain Name System (DNS) | Storing Certificates in the Domain Name System (DNS) | |||
draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2538bis-03 | draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2538bis-04 | |||
Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any | By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any | |||
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware | 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 | 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. | aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 | skipping to change at page 1, line 33 | |||
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 December 12, 2005. | This Internet-Draft will expire on March 3, 2006. | |||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
Cryptographic public key are frequently published and their | Cryptographic public keys are frequently published and their | |||
authenticity demonstrated by certificates. A CERT resource record | authenticity demonstrated by certificates. A CERT resource record | |||
(RR) is defined so that such certificates and related certificate | (RR) is defined so that such certificates and related certificate | |||
revocation lists can be stored in the Domain Name System (DNS). | revocation lists can be stored in the Domain Name System (DNS). | |||
This document obsolete RFC 2538. | This document obsoletes RFC 2538. | |||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
2. The CERT Resource Record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. The CERT Resource Record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
2.1 Certificate Type Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.1. Certificate Type Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
2.2 Text Representation of CERT RRs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2.2. Text Representation of CERT RRs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
2.3 X.509 OIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.3. X.509 OIDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
3. Appropriate Owner Names for CERT RRs . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3. Appropriate Owner Names for CERT RRs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
3.1 Content-based X.509 CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.1. Content-based X.509 CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
3.2 Purpose-based X.509 CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 3.2. Purpose-based X.509 CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
3.3 Content-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.3. Content-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
3.4 Purpose-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.4. Purpose-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
3.5 Owner names for IPKIX, ISPKI, and IPGP . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.5. Owner names for IPKIX, ISPKI, and IPGP . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
4. Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 4. Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
5. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 5. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
9. Changes since RFC 2538 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 9. Changes since RFC 2538 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | Appendix A. Copying conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
10.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
10.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
A. Copying conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 14 | Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
Public keys are frequently published in the form of a certificate and | Public keys are frequently published in the form of a certificate and | |||
their authenticity is commonly demonstrated by certificates and | their authenticity is commonly demonstrated by certificates and | |||
related certificate revocation lists (CRLs). A certificate is a | related certificate revocation lists (CRLs). A certificate is a | |||
binding, through a cryptographic digital signature, of a public key, | binding, through a cryptographic digital signature, of a public key, | |||
a validity interval and/or conditions, and identity, authorization, | a validity interval and/or conditions, and identity, authorization, | |||
or other information. A certificate revocation list is a list of | or other information. A certificate revocation list is a list of | |||
certificates that are revoked, and incidental information, all signed | certificates that are revoked, and incidental information, all signed | |||
by the signer (issuer) of the revoked certificates. Examples are | by the signer (issuer) of the revoked certificates. Examples are | |||
X.509 certificates/CRLs in the X.500 directory system or OpenPGP | X.509 certificates/CRLs in the X.500 directory system or OpenPGP | |||
certificates/revocations used by OpenPGP software. | certificates/revocations used by OpenPGP software. | |||
Section 2 below specifies a CERT resource record (RR) for the storage | Section 2 below specifies a CERT resource record (RR) for the storage | |||
of certificates in the Domain Name System. | of certificates in the Domain Name System [1] [2]. | |||
Section 3 discusses appropriate owner names for CERT RRs. | Section 3 discusses appropriate owner names for CERT RRs. | |||
Sections 4, 5, and 6 below cover performance, IANA, and security | Sections 4, 5, and 6 below cover performance, IANA, and security | |||
considerations, respectively. | considerations, respectively. | |||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
document are to be interpreted as described in [3]. | document are to be interpreted as described in [3]. | |||
skipping to change at page 3, line 45 | skipping to change at page 3, line 45 | |||
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 | |||
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| type | key tag | | | type | key tag | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| algorithm | / | | algorithm | / | |||
+---------------+ certificate or CRL / | +---------------+ certificate or CRL / | |||
/ / | / / | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| | |||
The type field is the certificate type as define in section 2.1 | The type field is the certificate type as defined in section 2.1 | |||
below. | below. | |||
The algorithm field has the same meaning as the algorithm field in | ||||
DNSKEY and RRSIG RRs [10] except that a zero algorithm field | ||||
indicates the algorithm is unknown to a secure DNS, which may simply | ||||
be the result of the algorithm not having been standardized for | ||||
DNSSEC. | ||||
The key tag field is the 16 bit value computed for the key embedded | The key tag field is the 16 bit value computed for the key embedded | |||
in the certificate, using the RRSIG Key Tag algorithm described in | in the certificate, using the RRSIG Key Tag algorithm described in | |||
Appendix B of [10]. This field is used as an efficiency measure to | Appendix B of [10]. This field is used as an efficiency measure to | |||
pick which CERT RRs may be applicable to a particular key. The key | pick which CERT RRs may be applicable to a particular key. The key | |||
tag can be calculated for the key in question and then only CERT RRs | tag can be calculated for the key in question and then only CERT RRs | |||
with the same key tag need be examined. However, the key must always | with the same key tag need be examined. However, the key must always | |||
be transformed to the format it would have as the public key portion | be transformed to the format it would have as the public key portion | |||
of a DNSKEY RR before the key tag is computed. This is only possible | of a DNSKEY RR before the key tag is computed. This is only possible | |||
if the key is applicable to an algorithm (and limits such as key size | if the key is applicable to an algorithm (and limits such as key size | |||
limits) defined for DNS security. If it is not, the algorithm field | limits) defined for DNS security. If it is not, the algorithm field | |||
MUST BE zero and the tag field is meaningless and SHOULD BE zero. | MUST BE zero and the tag field is meaningless and SHOULD BE zero. | |||
2.1 Certificate Type Values | The algorithm field has the same meaning as the algorithm field in | |||
DNSKEY and RRSIG RRs [10], except that a zero algorithm field | ||||
indicates the algorithm is unknown to a secure DNS, which may simply | ||||
be the result of the algorithm not having been standardized for | ||||
DNSSEC. | ||||
2.1. Certificate Type Values | ||||
The following values are defined or reserved: | The following values are defined or reserved: | |||
Value Mnemonic Certificate Type | Value Mnemonic Certificate Type | |||
----- -------- ----------- ---- | ----- -------- ---------------- | |||
0 reserved | 0 reserved | |||
1 PKIX X.509 as per PKIX | 1 PKIX X.509 as per PKIX | |||
2 SPKI SPKI certificate | 2 SPKI SPKI certificate | |||
3 PGP OpenPGP packet | 3 PGP OpenPGP packet | |||
4 IPKIX The URL of an X.509 data object | 4 IPKIX The URL of an X.509 data object | |||
5 ISPKI The URL of an SPKI certificate | 5 ISPKI The URL of an SPKI certificate | |||
6 IPGP The URL of an OpenPGP packet | 6 IPGP The URL of an OpenPGP packet | |||
7-252 available for IANA assignment | 7-252 available for IANA assignment | |||
253 URI URI private | 253 URI URI private | |||
254 OID OID private | 254 OID OID private | |||
255-65534 available for IANA assignment | 255-65534 available for IANA assignment | |||
65535 reserved | 65535 reserved | |||
The PKIX type is reserved to indicate an X.509 certificate conforming | The PKIX type is reserved to indicate an X.509 certificate conforming | |||
to the profile being defined by the IETF PKIX working group. The | to the profile being defined by the IETF PKIX working group. The | |||
certificate section will start with a one byte unsigned OID length | certificate section will start with a one-byte unsigned OID length | |||
and then an X.500 OID indicating the nature of the remainder of the | and then an X.500 OID indicating the nature of the remainder of the | |||
certificate section (see 2.3 below). (NOTE: X.509 certificates do | certificate section (see 2.3 below). (NOTE: X.509 certificates do | |||
not include their X.500 directory type designating OID as a prefix.) | not include their X.500 directory type designating OID as a prefix.) | |||
The SPKI type is reserved to indicate the SPKI certificate format | The SPKI type is reserved to indicate the SPKI certificate format | |||
[13], for use when the SPKI documents are moved from experimental | [13], for use when the SPKI documents are moved from experimental | |||
status. | status. | |||
The PGP type indicates an OpenPGP packet as described in [6] and its | The PGP type indicates an OpenPGP packet as described in [6] and its | |||
extensions and successors. Two uses are to transfer public key | extensions and successors. Two uses are to transfer public key | |||
material and revocation signatures. The data is binary, and MUST NOT | material and revocation signatures. The data is binary, and MUST NOT | |||
be encoded into an ASCII armor. An implementation SHOULD process | be encoded into an ASCII armor. An implementation SHOULD process | |||
transferable public keys as described in section 10.1 of [5], but it | transferable public keys as described in section 10.1 of [6], but it | |||
MAY handle additional OpenPGP packets. | MAY handle additional OpenPGP packets. | |||
The IPKIX, ISPKI and IPGP types indicate a URL which will serve the | The IPKIX, ISPKI and IPGP types indicate a URL which will serve the | |||
content that would have been in the "certificate, CRL or URL" field | content that would have been in the "certificate, CRL or URL" field | |||
of the corresponding (PKIX, SPKI or PGP) packet types. These types | of the corresponding (PKIX, SPKI or PGP) packet types. These types | |||
are known as "indirect". These packet types MUST be used when the | are known as "indirect". These packet types MUST be used when the | |||
content is too large to fit in the CERT RR, and MAY be used at the | content is too large to fit in the CERT RR, and MAY be used at the | |||
implementations discretion. They SHOULD NOT be used where the entire | implementer's discretion. They SHOULD NOT be used where the entire | |||
UDP packet would have fit in 512 bytes. | UDP packet would have fit in 512 bytes. | |||
The URI private type indicates a certificate format defined by an | The URI private type indicates a certificate format defined by an | |||
absolute URI. The certificate portion of the CERT RR MUST begin with | absolute URI. The certificate portion of the CERT RR MUST begin with | |||
a null terminated URI [5] and the data after the null is the private | a null terminated URI [5] and the data after the null is the private | |||
format certificate itself. The URI SHOULD be such that a retrieval | format certificate itself. The URI SHOULD be such that a retrieval | |||
from it will lead to documentation on the format of the certificate. | from it will lead to documentation on the format of the certificate. | |||
Recognition of private certificate types need not be based on URI | Recognition of private certificate types need not be based on URI | |||
equality but can use various forms of pattern matching so that, for | equality but can use various forms of pattern matching so that, for | |||
example, subtype or version information can also be encoded into the | example, subtype or version information can also be encoded into the | |||
URI. | URI. | |||
The OID private type indicates a private format certificate specified | The OID private type indicates a private format certificate specified | |||
by a an ISO OID prefix. The certificate section will start with a | by an ISO OID prefix. The certificate section will start with a one- | |||
one byte unsigned OID length and then a BER encoded OID indicating | byte unsigned OID length and then a BER encoded OID indicating the | |||
the nature of the remainder of the certificate section. This can be | nature of the remainder of the certificate section. This can be an | |||
an X.509 certificate format or some other format. X.509 certificates | X.509 certificate format or some other format. X.509 certificates | |||
that conform to the IETF PKIX profile SHOULD be indicated by the PKIX | that conform to the IETF PKIX profile SHOULD be indicated by the PKIX | |||
type, not the OID private type. Recognition of private certificate | type, not the OID private type. Recognition of private certificate | |||
types need not be based on OID equality but can use various forms of | types need not be based on OID equality but can use various forms of | |||
pattern matching such as OID prefix. | pattern matching such as OID prefix. | |||
2.2 Text Representation of CERT RRs | 2.2. Text Representation of CERT RRs | |||
The RDATA portion of a CERT RR has the type field as an unsigned | The RDATA portion of a CERT RR has the type field as an unsigned | |||
decimal integer or as a mnemonic symbol as listed in section 2.1 | decimal integer or as a mnemonic symbol as listed in section 2.1 | |||
above. | above. | |||
The key tag field is represented as an unsigned decimal integer. | The key tag field is represented as an unsigned decimal integer. | |||
The algorithm field is represented as an unsigned decimal integer or | The algorithm field is represented as an unsigned decimal integer or | |||
a mnemonic symbol as listed in [10]. | a mnemonic symbol as listed in [10]. | |||
The certificate / CRL portion is represented in base 64 [14] and may | The certificate / CRL portion is represented in base 64 [14] and may | |||
be divided up into any number of white space separated substrings, | be divided up into any number of white space separated substrings, | |||
down to single base 64 digits, which are concatenated to obtain the | down to single base 64 digits, which are concatenated to obtain the | |||
full signature. These substrings can span lines using the standard | full signature. These substrings can span lines using the standard | |||
parenthesis. | parenthesis. | |||
Note that the certificate / CRL portion may have internal sub-fields | Note that the certificate / CRL portion may have internal sub-fields, | |||
but these do not appear in the master file representation. For | but these do not appear in the master file representation. For | |||
example, with type 254, there will be an OID size, an OID, and then | example, with type 254, there will be an OID size, an OID, and then | |||
the certificate / CRL proper. But only a single logical base 64 | the certificate / CRL proper. But only a single logical base 64 | |||
string will appear in the text representation. | string will appear in the text representation. | |||
2.3 X.509 OIDs | 2.3. X.509 OIDs | |||
OIDs have been defined in connection with the X.500 directory for | OIDs have been defined in connection with the X.500 directory for | |||
user certificates, certification authority certificates, revocations | user certificates, certification authority certificates, revocations | |||
of certification authority, and revocations of user certificates. | of certification authority, and revocations of user certificates. | |||
The following table lists the OIDs, their BER encoding, and their | The following table lists the OIDs, their BER encoding, and their | |||
length prefixed hex format for use in CERT RRs: | length-prefixed hex format for use in CERT RRs: | |||
id-at-userCertificate | id-at-userCertificate | |||
= { joint-iso-ccitt(2) ds(5) at(4) 36 } | = { joint-iso-ccitt(2) ds(5) at(4) 36 } | |||
== 0x 03 55 04 24 | == 0x 03 55 04 24 | |||
id-at-cACertificate | id-at-cACertificate | |||
= { joint-iso-ccitt(2) ds(5) at(4) 37 } | = { joint-iso-ccitt(2) ds(5) at(4) 37 } | |||
== 0x 03 55 04 25 | == 0x 03 55 04 25 | |||
id-at-authorityRevocationList | id-at-authorityRevocationList | |||
= { joint-iso-ccitt(2) ds(5) at(4) 38 } | = { joint-iso-ccitt(2) ds(5) at(4) 38 } | |||
== 0x 03 55 04 26 | == 0x 03 55 04 26 | |||
skipping to change at page 6, line 39 | skipping to change at page 6, line 43 | |||
It is recommended that certificate CERT RRs be stored under a domain | It is recommended that certificate CERT RRs be stored under a domain | |||
name related to their subject, i.e., the name of the entity intended | name related to their subject, i.e., the name of the entity intended | |||
to control the private key corresponding to the public key being | to control the private key corresponding to the public key being | |||
certified. It is recommended that certificate revocation list CERT | certified. It is recommended that certificate revocation list CERT | |||
RRs be stored under a domain name related to their issuer. | RRs be stored under a domain name related to their issuer. | |||
Following some of the guidelines below may result in the use in DNS | Following some of the guidelines below may result in the use in DNS | |||
names of characters that require DNS quoting which is to use a | names of characters that require DNS quoting which is to use a | |||
backslash followed by the octal representation of the ASCII code for | backslash followed by the octal representation of the ASCII code for | |||
the character such as \000 for NULL. | the character (e.g., \000 for NULL). | |||
The choice of name under which CERT RRs are stored is important to | The choice of name under which CERT RRs are stored is important to | |||
clients that perform CERT queries. In some situations, the client | clients that perform CERT queries. In some situations, the clients | |||
may not know all information about the CERT RR object it wishes to | may not know all information about the CERT RR object it wishes to | |||
retrieve. For example, a client may not know the subject name of an | retrieve. For example, a client may not know the subject name of an | |||
X.509 certificate, or the e-mail address of the owner of an OpenPGP | X.509 certificate, or the e-mail address of the owner of an OpenPGP | |||
key. Further, the client might only know the hostname of a service | key. Further, the client might only know the hostname of a service | |||
that uses X.509 certificates or the Key ID of an OpenPGP key. | that uses X.509 certificates or the Key ID of an OpenPGP key. | |||
This motivates describing two different owner name guidelines. We | Therefore, two owner name guidelines are defined: content-based owner | |||
call the two rules content-based owner names and purpose-based owner | names and purpose-based owner names. A content-based owner name is | |||
names. A content-based owner name is derived from the content of the | derived from the content of the CERT RR data; for example, the | |||
CERT RR data; for example the Subject field in an X.509 certificate | Subject field in an X.509 certificate or the User ID field in OpenPGP | |||
or the User ID field in OpenPGP keys. A purpose-based owner name is | keys. A purpose-based owner name is a name that a client retrieving | |||
selected to be a name that clients that wishes to retrieve CERT RRs | CERT RRs MUST already know; for example, the host name of an X.509 | |||
are expected to know; for example the host name of a X.509 protected | protected service or the Key ID of an OpenPGP key. The content-based | |||
service or a Key ID of an OpenPGP key. Note that in some situations, | and purpose-based owner name MAY be the same; for example, when a | |||
the content-based and purpose-based owner name can be the same; for | client looks up a key based on the From: address of an incoming | |||
example when a client look up keys based on e-mail addresses for | e-mail. | |||
incoming e-mail. | ||||
Implementations SHOULD use the purpose-based owner name guidelines | Implementations SHOULD use the purpose-based owner name guidelines | |||
described in this document, and MAY use CNAMEs at content-based owner | described in this document, and MAY use CNAMEs of content-based owner | |||
names (or other names), pointing to the purpose-based owner name. | names (or other names), pointing to the purpose-based owner name. | |||
3.1 Content-based X.509 CERT RR Names | 3.1. Content-based X.509 CERT RR Names | |||
Some X.509 versions permit multiple names to be associated with | Some X.509 versions permit multiple names to be associated with | |||
subjects and issuers under "Subject Alternate Name" and "Issuer | subjects and issuers under "Subject Alternate Name" and "Issuer | |||
Alternate Name". For example, x.509v3 has such Alternate Names with | Alternate Name". For example, X.509v3 has such Alternate Names with | |||
an ASN.1 specification as follows: | an ASN.1 specification as follows: | |||
GeneralName ::= CHOICE { | GeneralName ::= CHOICE { | |||
otherName [0] INSTANCE OF OTHER-NAME, | otherName [0] INSTANCE OF OTHER-NAME, | |||
rfc822Name [1] IA5String, | rfc822Name [1] IA5String, | |||
dNSName [2] IA5String, | dNSName [2] IA5String, | |||
x400Address [3] EXPLICIT OR-ADDRESS.&Type, | x400Address [3] EXPLICIT OR-ADDRESS.&Type, | |||
directoryName [4] EXPLICIT Name, | directoryName [4] EXPLICIT Name, | |||
ediPartyName [5] EDIPartyName, | ediPartyName [5] EDIPartyName, | |||
uniformResourceIdentifier [6] IA5String, | uniformResourceIdentifier [6] IA5String, | |||
skipping to change at page 7, line 44 | skipping to change at page 7, line 46 | |||
registeredID [8] OBJECT IDENTIFIER | registeredID [8] OBJECT IDENTIFIER | |||
} | } | |||
The recommended locations of CERT storage are as follows, in priority | The recommended locations of CERT storage are as follows, in priority | |||
order: | order: | |||
1. If a domain name is included in the identification in the | 1. If a domain name is included in the identification in the | |||
certificate or CRL, that should be used. | certificate or CRL, that should be used. | |||
2. If a domain name is not included but an IP address is included, | 2. If a domain name is not included but an IP address is included, | |||
then the translation of that IP address into the appropriate | then the translation of that IP address into the appropriate | |||
inverse domain name should be used. | inverse domain name should be used. | |||
3. If neither of the above it used but a URI containing a domain | 3. If neither of the above is used, but a URI containing a domain | |||
name is present, that domain name should be used. | name is present, that domain name should be used. | |||
4. If none of the above is included but a character string name is | 4. If none of the above is included but a character string name is | |||
included, then it should be treated as described for OpenPGP | included, then it should be treated as described for OpenPGP | |||
names below. | names below. | |||
5. If none of the above apply, then the distinguished name (DN) | 5. If none of the above apply, then the distinguished name (DN) | |||
should be mapped into a domain name as specified in [4]. | should be mapped into a domain name as specified in [4]. | |||
Example 1: Assume that an X.509v3 certificate is issued to /CN=John | Example 1: An X.509v3 certificate is issued to /CN=John Doe /DC=Doe/ | |||
Doe/DC=Doe/DC=com/DC=xy/O=Doe Inc/C=XY/ with Subject Alternative | DC=com/DC=xy/O=Doe Inc/C=XY/ with Subject Alternative Names of (a) | |||
names of (a) string "John (the Man) Doe", (b) domain name john- | string "John (the Man) Doe", (b) domain name john-doe.com, and (c) | |||
doe.com, and (c) uri <https://www.secure.john-doe.com:8080/>. Then | uri <https://www.secure.john-doe.com:8080/>. The storage locations | |||
the storage locations recommended, in priority order, would be | recommended, in priority order, would be | |||
1. john-doe.com, | 1. john-doe.com, | |||
2. www.secure.john-doe.com, and | 2. www.secure.john-doe.com, and | |||
3. Doe.com.xy. | 3. Doe.com.xy. | |||
Example 2: Assume that an X.509v3 certificate is issued to /CN=James | Example 2: An X.509v3 certificate is issued to /CN=James Hacker/ | |||
Hacker/L=Basingstoke/O=Widget Inc/C=GB/ with Subject Alternate names | L=Basingstoke/O=Widget Inc/C=GB/ with Subject Alternate names of (a) | |||
of (a) domain name widget.foo.example, (b) IPv4 address | domain name widget.foo.example, (b) IPv4 address 10.251.13.201, and | |||
10.251.13.201, and (c) string "James Hacker | (c) string "James Hacker <hacker@mail.widget.foo.example>". The | |||
<hacker@mail.widget.foo.example>". Then the storage locations | storage locations recommended, in priority order, would be | |||
recommended, in priority order, would be | ||||
1. widget.foo.example, | 1. widget.foo.example, | |||
2. 201.13.251.10.in-addr.arpa, and | 2. 201.13.251.10.in-addr.arpa, and | |||
3. hacker.mail.widget.foo.example. | 3. hacker.mail.widget.foo.example. | |||
3.2 Purpose-based X.509 CERT RR Names | 3.2. Purpose-based X.509 CERT RR Names | |||
It is difficult for clients that do not already posses a certificate | Due to the difficulty for clients that do not already possess a | |||
to reconstruct the content-based owner name that should be used to | certificate to reconstruct the content-based owner name, purpose- | |||
retrieve the certificate. For this reason, purpose-based owner names | based owner names are recommended in this section. Recommendations | |||
are recommended in this section. Because purpose-based owner names | for purpose-based owner names vary per scenario. The following table | |||
by nature depend on the specific scenario, or purpose, for which the | summarizes the purpose-based X.509 CERT RR owner name guidelines for | |||
certificate will be used, there are more than one recommendation. | use with S/MIME [16], SSL/TLS [11], and IPSEC [12]: | |||
The following table summarize the purpose-based X.509 CERT RR owner | ||||
name guidelines for use with S/MIME [16], SSL/TLS [11], and IPSEC | ||||
[12]. | ||||
Scenario Owner name | Scenario Owner name | |||
------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ ---------------------------------------------- | |||
S/MIME Certificate Standard translation of RFC 822 email address. | S/MIME Certificate Standard translation of an RFC 2822 email | |||
Example: A S/MIME certificate for | address. Example: An S/MIME certificate for | |||
"postmaster@example.org" will use a standard | "postmaster@example.org" will use a standard | |||
hostname translation of the owner name, | hostname translation of the owner name, | |||
i.e. "postmaster.example.org". | "postmaster.example.org". | |||
TLS Certificate Hostname of the TLS server. | TLS Certificate Hostname of the TLS server. | |||
IPSEC Certificate Hostname of the IPSEC machine, and/or for | IPSEC Certificate Hostname of the IPSEC machine and/or, for IPv4 | |||
IPv4 or IPv6 addresses the fully qualified | or IPv6 addresses, the fully qualified domain | |||
domain name in the appropriate reverse domain. | name in the appropriate reverse domain. | |||
An alternative approach for IPSEC is to store raw public keys [15]. | An alternate approach for IPSEC is to store raw public keys [15]. | |||
3.3 Content-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names | 3.3. Content-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names | |||
OpenPGP signed keys (certificates) use a general character string | OpenPGP signed keys (certificates) use a general character string | |||
User ID [6]. However, it is recommended by OpenPGP that such names | User ID [6]. However, it is recommended by OpenPGP that such names | |||
include the RFC 2822 [8] email address of the party, as in "Leslie | include the RFC 2822 [8] email address of the party, as in "Leslie | |||
Example <Leslie@host.example>". If such a format is used, the CERT | Example <Leslie@host.example>". If such a format is used, the CERT | |||
should be under the standard translation of the email address into a | should be under the standard translation of the email address into a | |||
domain name, which would be leslie.host.example in this case. If no | domain name, which would be leslie.host.example in this case. If no | |||
RFC 2822 name can be extracted from the string name no specific | RFC 2822 name can be extracted from the string name, no specific | |||
domain name is recommended. | domain name is recommended. | |||
If a user has more than one email address, the CNAME type can be used | If a user has more than one email address, the CNAME type can be used | |||
to reduce the amount of data stored in the DNS. For example: | to reduce the amount of data stored in the DNS. Example: | |||
$ORIGIN example.org. | $ORIGIN example.org. | |||
smith IN CERT PGP 0 0 <OpenPGP binary> | smith IN CERT PGP 0 0 <OpenPGP binary> | |||
john.smith IN CNAME smith | john.smith IN CNAME smith | |||
js IN CNAME smith | js IN CNAME smith | |||
3.4 Purpose-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names | 3.4. Purpose-based OpenPGP CERT RR Names | |||
Applications that receive an OpenPGP packet containing encrypted or | Applications that receive an OpenPGP packet containing encrypted or | |||
signed data but do not know the email address of the sender will have | signed data but do not know the email address of the sender will have | |||
difficulties constructing the correct owner name and cannot use the | difficulties constructing the correct owner name and cannot use the | |||
content-based owner name guidelines. However, these clients commonly | content-based owner name guidelines. However, these clients commonly | |||
know the key fingerprint or the Key ID. The key ID is found in | know the key fingerprint or the Key ID. The key ID is found in | |||
OpenPGP packets, and the key fingerprint is commonly found in | OpenPGP packets, and the key fingerprint is commonly found in | |||
auxilliary data that may be available. For these situations, it is | auxilliary data that may be available. In this case, use of an owner | |||
recommended to use an owner name identical to the key fingerprint and | name identical to the key fingerprint and the key ID expressed in | |||
key ID expressed in hexadecimal [14]. For example: | hexadecimal [14] is recommended. Example: | |||
$ORIGIN example.org. | $ORIGIN example.org. | |||
0424D4EE81A0E3D119C6F835EDA21E94B565716F IN CERT PGP ... | 0424D4EE81A0E3D119C6F835EDA21E94B565716F IN CERT PGP ... | |||
F835EDA21E94B565716F IN CERT PGP ... | F835EDA21E94B565716F IN CERT PGP ... | |||
B565716F IN CERT PGP ... | B565716F IN CERT PGP ... | |||
If the same key material is stored at several owner names, the use of | If the same key material is stored for several owner names, the use | |||
CNAME may be used to avoid data duplication. Note that CNAME is not | of CNAME may be used to avoid data duplication. Note that CNAME is | |||
always applicable, because it map an owner names to the other for all | not always applicable, because it maps one owner name to the other | |||
purposes, and this may be sub-optimal when two keys with the same Key | for all purposes, which may be sub-optimal when two keys with the | |||
ID are stored. | same Key ID are stored. | |||
3.5 Owner names for IPKIX, ISPKI, and IPGP | 3.5. Owner names for IPKIX, ISPKI, and IPGP | |||
These types are stored under the same owner names, both purpose- and | These types are stored under the same owner names, both purpose- and | |||
content-based, as the PKIX, SPKI and PGP types, respectively. | content-based, as the PKIX, SPKI and PGP types. | |||
4. Performance Considerations | 4. Performance Considerations | |||
Current Domain Name System (DNS) implementations are optimized for | Current Domain Name System (DNS) implementations are optimized for | |||
small transfers, typically not more than 512 bytes including | small transfers, typically not more than 512 bytes including | |||
overhead. While larger transfers will perform correctly and work is | overhead. While larger transfers will perform correctly and work is | |||
underway to make larger transfers more efficient, it is still | underway to make larger transfers more efficient, it is still | |||
advisable at this time to make every reasonable effort to minimize | advisable at this time to make every reasonable effort to minimize | |||
the size of certificates stored within the DNS. Steps that can be | the size of certificates stored within the DNS. Steps that can be | |||
taken may include using the fewest possible optional or extensions | taken may include using the fewest possible optional or extension | |||
fields and using short field values for variable length fields that | fields and using short field values for necessary variable length | |||
must be included. | fields. | |||
The RDATA field in the DNS protocol may only hold data of size 65535 | The RDATA field in the DNS protocol may only hold data of size 65535 | |||
octets (64kb) or less. This means that each CERT RR cannot contain | octets (64kb) or less. This means that each CERT RR MUST NOT contain | |||
more than 64kb worth of payload, even if the corresponding | more than 64kb of payload, even if the corresponding certificate or | |||
certificate or certificate revocation list is larger. This document | certificate revocation list is larger. This document addresses this | |||
address this by defining "indirect" data types for each normal type. | by defining "indirect" data types for each normal type. | |||
5. Contributors | 5. Contributors | |||
The majority of this document is copied verbatim from RFC 2538, by | The majority of this document is copied verbatim from RFC 2538, by | |||
Donald Eastlake 3rd and Olafur Gudmundsson. | Donald Eastlake 3rd and Olafur Gudmundsson. | |||
6. Acknowledgements | 6. Acknowledgements | |||
Thanks to David Shaw and Michael Graff for their contributions to | Thanks to David Shaw and Michael Graff for their contributions to | |||
earlier works that motivated, and served as inspiration for, this | earlier works that motivated, and served as inspiration for, this | |||
document. | document. | |||
This document was improved by suggestions and comments from Olivier | This document was improved by suggestions and comments from Olivier | |||
Dubuisson, Olaf M. Kolkman, Ben Laurie, Samuel Weiler, and Florian | Dubuisson, Olaf M. Kolkman, Ben Laurie, Edward Lewis, Jason | |||
Weimer. No doubt the list is incomplete. We apologize to anyone we | Sloderbeck, Samuel Weiler, and Florian Weimer. No doubt the list is | |||
left out. | incomplete. We apologize to anyone we left out. | |||
7. Security Considerations | 7. Security Considerations | |||
By definition, certificates contain their own authenticating | By definition, certificates contain their own authenticating | |||
signature. Thus it is reasonable to store certificates in non-secure | signature. Thus, it is reasonable to store certificates in non- | |||
DNS zones or to retrieve certificates from DNS with DNS security | secure DNS zones or to retrieve certificates from DNS with DNS | |||
checking not implemented or deferred for efficiency. The results MAY | security checking not implemented or deferred for efficiency. The | |||
be trusted if the certificate chain is verified back to a known | results MAY be trusted if the certificate chain is verified back to a | |||
trusted key and this conforms with the user's security policy. | known trusted key and this conforms with the user's security policy. | |||
Alternatively, if certificates are retrieved from a secure DNS zone | Alternatively, if certificates are retrieved from a secure DNS zone | |||
with DNS security checking enabled and are verified by DNS security, | with DNS security checking enabled and are verified by DNS security, | |||
the key within the retrieved certificate MAY be trusted without | the key within the retrieved certificate MAY be trusted without | |||
verifying the certificate chain if this conforms with the user's | verifying the certificate chain if this conforms with the user's | |||
security policy. | security policy. | |||
If an organization chooses to issue certificates for it's employees, | ||||
placing CERT RR's in the DNS by owner name, and if DNSSEC (with NSEC) | ||||
is in use, it is possible for someone to enumerate all employees of | ||||
the organization. This is usually not considered desirable, for the | ||||
same reason enterprise phone listings are not often publicly | ||||
published and are even mark confidential. | ||||
When the URI type is used, it should be understood that it introduces | When the URI type is used, it should be understood that it introduces | |||
an additional indirection that may allow for a new attack vector. | an additional indirection that may allow for a new attack vector. | |||
One method to secure that indirection is to include a hash of the | One method to secure that indirection is to include a hash of the | |||
certificate in the URI itself. | certificate in the URI itself. | |||
CERT RRs are not used by DNSSEC [9] so there are no security | CERT RRs are not used by DNSSEC [9], so there are no security | |||
considerations related to CERT RRs and securing the DNS itself. | considerations related to CERT RRs and securing the DNS itself. | |||
If DNSSEC is used then the non-existence of a CERT RR, and | If DNSSEC is used, then the non-existence of a CERT RR and, | |||
consequently certificates or revocation lists, can be securely | consequently, certificates or revocation lists can be securely | |||
asserted. Without DNSSEC, this is not possible. | asserted. Without DNSSEC, this is not possible. | |||
8. IANA Considerations | 8. IANA Considerations | |||
Certificate types 0x0000 through 0x00FF and 0xFF00 through 0xFFFF can | Certificate types 0x0000 through 0x00FF and 0xFF00 through 0xFFFF can | |||
only be assigned by an IETF standards action [7]. This document | only be assigned by an IETF standards action [7]. This document | |||
assigns 0x0001 through 0x0006 and 0x00FD and 0x00FE. Certificate | assigns 0x0001 through 0x0006 and 0x00FD and 0x00FE. Certificate | |||
types 0x0100 through 0xFEFF are assigned through IETF Consensus [7] | types 0x0100 through 0xFEFF are assigned through IETF Consensus [7] | |||
based on RFC documentation of the certificate type. The availability | based on RFC documentation of the certificate type. The availability | |||
of private types under 0x00FD and 0x00FE should satisfy most | of private types under 0x00FD and 0x00FE should satisfy most | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 10 | skipping to change at page 12, line 25 | |||
6. Add examples that suggest use of CNAME to reduce bandwidth. | 6. Add examples that suggest use of CNAME to reduce bandwidth. | |||
7. In section 3, appended the last paragraphs that discuss | 7. In section 3, appended the last paragraphs that discuss | |||
"content-based" vs "purpose-based" owner names. Add section 3.2 | "content-based" vs "purpose-based" owner names. Add section 3.2 | |||
for purpose-based X.509 CERT owner names, and section 3.4 for | for purpose-based X.509 CERT owner names, and section 3.4 for | |||
purpose-based OpenPGP CERT owner names. | purpose-based OpenPGP CERT owner names. | |||
8. Added size considerations. | 8. Added size considerations. | |||
9. The SPKI types has been reserved, until RFC 2692/2693 is moved | 9. The SPKI types has been reserved, until RFC 2692/2693 is moved | |||
from the experimental status. | from the experimental status. | |||
10. Added indirect types IPKIX, ISPKI, and IPGP. | 10. Added indirect types IPKIX, ISPKI, and IPGP. | |||
Appendix A. Copying conditions | ||||
Regarding the portion of this document that was written by Simon | ||||
Josefsson ("the author", for the remainder of this section), the | ||||
author makes no guarantees and is not responsible for any damage | ||||
resulting from its use. The author grants irrevocable permission to | ||||
anyone to use, modify, and distribute it in any way that does not | ||||
diminish the rights of anyone else to use, modify, and distribute it, | ||||
provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain | ||||
misleading author or version information. Derivative works need not | ||||
be licensed under similar terms. | ||||
10. References | 10. References | |||
10.1 Normative References | 10.1. Normative References | |||
[1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", | [1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", | |||
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. | STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. | |||
[2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and | [2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and | |||
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. | specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. | |||
[3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement | [3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement | |||
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 48 | skipping to change at page 13, line 28 | |||
[8] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822, April 2001. | [8] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822, April 2001. | |||
[9] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, | [9] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, | |||
"DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC 4033, | "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC 4033, | |||
March 2005. | March 2005. | |||
[10] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, | [10] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, | |||
"Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions", RFC 4034, | "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions", RFC 4034, | |||
March 2005. | March 2005. | |||
10.2 Informative References | 10.2. Informative References | |||
[11] Dierks, T. and C. Allen, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0", | [11] Dierks, T. and C. Allen, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0", | |||
RFC 2246, January 1999. | RFC 2246, January 1999. | |||
[12] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the | [12] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the | |||
Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998. | Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998. | |||
[13] Ellison, C., Frantz, B., Lampson, B., Rivest, R., Thomas, B., | [13] Ellison, C., Frantz, B., Lampson, B., Rivest, R., Thomas, B., | |||
and T. Ylonen, "SPKI Certificate Theory", RFC 2693, | and T. Ylonen, "SPKI Certificate Theory", RFC 2693, | |||
September 1999. | September 1999. | |||
skipping to change at page 13, line 28 | skipping to change at page 15, line 5 | |||
[16] Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions | [16] Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions | |||
(S/MIME) Version 3.1 Message Specification", RFC 3851, | (S/MIME) Version 3.1 Message Specification", RFC 3851, | |||
July 2004. | July 2004. | |||
Author's Address | Author's Address | |||
Simon Josefsson | Simon Josefsson | |||
Email: simon@josefsson.org | Email: simon@josefsson.org | |||
Appendix A. Copying conditions | ||||
Regarding the portion of this document that was written by Simon | ||||
Josefsson ("the author", for the remainder of this section), the | ||||
author makes no guarantees and is not responsible for any damage | ||||
resulting from its use. The author grants irrevocable permission to | ||||
anyone to use, modify, and distribute it in any way that does not | ||||
diminish the rights of anyone else to use, modify, and distribute it, | ||||
provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain | ||||
misleading author or version information. Derivative works need not | ||||
be licensed under similar terms. | ||||
Intellectual Property Statement | Intellectual Property Statement | |||
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | |||
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | |||
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | |||
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | 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 | might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | |||
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | |||
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be | on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be | |||
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
End of changes. | ||||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/ |