diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc4402.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc4402.txt | 283 |
1 files changed, 283 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc4402.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc4402.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c6f1d87 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc4402.txt @@ -0,0 +1,283 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group N. Williams +Request for Comments: 4402 Sun +Category: Standards Track February 2006 + + + A Pseudo-Random Function (PRF) for the Kerberos V Generic Security + Service Application Program Interface (GSS-API) Mechanism + +Status of This Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). + +Abstract + + This document defines the Pseudo-Random Function (PRF) for the + Kerberos V mechanism for the Generic Security Service Application + Program Interface (GSS-API), based on the PRF defined for the + Kerberos V cryptographic framework, for keying application protocols + given an established Kerberos V GSS-API security context. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction ....................................................2 + 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................2 + 2. Kerberos V GSS Mechanism PRF ....................................2 + 3. IANA Considerations .............................................3 + 4. Security Considerations .........................................3 + 5. Normative References ............................................4 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Williams Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 4402 A PRF for the Kerberos V Mechanism February 2006 + + +1. Introduction + + This document specifies the Kerberos V GSS-API mechanism's [RFC4121] + pseudo-random function corresponding to [RFC4401]. The function is a + "PRF+" style construction. For more information see [RFC4401], + [RFC2743], [RFC2744], and [RFC4121]. + +1.1. Conventions Used in This Document + + The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this + document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. + +2. Kerberos V GSS Mechanism PRF + + The GSS-API PRF [RFC4401] function for the Kerberos V mechanism + [RFC4121] shall be the output of a PRF+ function based on the + encryption type's PRF function keyed with the negotiated session key + of the security context corresponding to the 'prf_key' input + parameter of GSS_Pseudo_random(). + + This PRF+ MUST be keyed with the key indicated by the 'prf_key' input + parameter as follows: + + o GSS_C_PRF_KEY_FULL -- use the sub-session key asserted by the + acceptor, if any, or the sub-session asserted by the initiator, if + any, or the Ticket's session key + + o GSS_C_PRF_KEY_PARTIAL -- use the sub-session key asserted by the + initiator, if any, or the Ticket's session key + + The PRF+ function is a simple counter-based extension of the Kerberos + V pseudo-random function [RFC3961] for the encryption type of the + security context's keys: + + PRF+(K, L, S) = truncate(L, T1 || T2 || .. || Tn) + + Tn = pseudo-random(K, n || S) + + where '||' is the concatenation operator, 'n' is encoded as a network + byte order 32-bit unsigned binary number, truncate(L, S) truncates + the input octet string S to length L, and pseudo-random() is the + Kerberos V pseudo-random function [RFC3961]. + + The maximum output size of the Kerberos V mechanism's GSS-API PRF + then is, necessarily, 2^32 times the output size of the pseudo- + random() function for the encryption type of the given key. + + + + +Williams Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 4402 A PRF for the Kerberos V Mechanism February 2006 + + + When the input size is longer than 2^14 octets as per [RFC4401] and + exceeds an implementation's resources, then the mechanism MUST return + GSS_S_FAILURE and GSS_KRB5_S_KG_INPUT_TOO_LONG as the minor status + code. + +3. IANA Considerations + + This document has no IANA considerations currently. If and when a + relevant IANA registry of GSS-API symbols and constants is created, + then the GSS_KRB5_S_KG_INPUT_TOO_LONG minor status code should be + added to such a registry. + +4. Security Considerations + + Kerberos V encryption types' PRF functions use a key derived from + contexts' session keys and should preserve the forward security + properties of the mechanisms' key exchanges. + + Legacy Kerberos V encryption types may be weak, particularly the + single-DES encryption types. + + See also [RFC4401] for generic security considerations of + GSS_Pseudo_random(). + + See also [RFC3961] for generic security considerations of the + Kerberos V cryptographic framework. + + Use of Ticket session keys, rather than sub-session keys, when + initiators and acceptors fail to assert sub-session keys, is + dangerous as ticket reuse can lead to key reuse; therefore, + initiators should assert sub-session keys always, and acceptors + should assert sub-session keys at least when initiators fail to do + so. + + The computational cost of computing this PRF+ may vary depending on + the Kerberos V encryption types being used, but generally the + computation of this PRF+ gets more expensive as the input and output + octet string lengths grow (note that the use of a counter in the PRF+ + construction allows for parallelization). This means that if an + application can be tricked into providing very large input octet + strings and requesting very long output octet strings, then that may + constitute a denial of service attack on the application; therefore, + applications SHOULD place appropriate limits on the size of any input + octet strings received from their peers without integrity protection. + + + + + + + +Williams Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 4402 A PRF for the Kerberos V Mechanism February 2006 + + +5. Normative References + + [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate + Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + + [RFC2743] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program + Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000. + + [RFC2744] Wray, J., "Generic Security Service API Version 2 : + C-bindings", RFC 2744, January 2000. + + [RFC3961] Raeburn, K., "Encryption and Checksum Specifications for + Kerberos 5", RFC 3961, February 2005. + + [RFC4121] Zhu, L., Jaganathan, K., and S. Hartman, "The Kerberos + Version 5 Generic Security Service Application Program + Interface (GSS-API) Mechanism: Version 2", RFC 4121, + July 2005. + + [RFC4401] Williams, N., "A Pseudo-Random Function (PRF) API + Extension for the Generic Security Service Application + Program Interface (GSS-API)", RFC 4401, February 2006. + +Author's Address + + Nicolas Williams + Sun Microsystems + 5300 Riata Trace Ct + Austin, TX 78727 + US + + EMail: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Williams Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 4402 A PRF for the Kerberos V Mechanism February 2006 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). + + This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions + contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors + retain all their rights. + + This document and the information contained herein are provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS + OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET + ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, + INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE + INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED + WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Intellectual Property + + The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any + Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to + pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in + this document or the extent to which any license under such rights + might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has + made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information + on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be + found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. + + Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any + assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an + attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of + such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this + specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at + http://www.ietf.org/ipr. + + The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any + copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary + rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement + this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at + ietf-ipr@ietf.org. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF + Administrative Support Activity (IASA). + + + + + + + +Williams Standards Track [Page 5] + |