summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc2808.txt
blob: 231865ec184b6434a9f4faf02a1c5a86330ffbcb (plain) (blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
Network Working Group                                        M. Nystrom
Request for Comments: 2808                             RSA Laboratories
Category: Informational                                      April 2000


                     The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   SecurID is a hardware token card product (or software emulation
   thereof) produced by RSA Security Inc., which is used for end-user
   authentication. This document defines a SASL [RFC2222] authentication
   mechanism using these tokens, thereby providing a means for such
   tokens to be used in SASL environments. This mechanism is only for
   authentication, and has no effect on the protocol encoding and is not
   designed to provide integrity or confidentiality services.

   This memo assumes the reader has basic familiarity with the SecurID
   token, its associated authentication protocol and SASL.

How to read this document

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

   In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate messages sent by the client and
   server respectively.

1. Introduction

   The SECURID SASL mechanism is a good choice for usage scenarios where
   a client, acting on behalf of a user, is untrusted, as a one-time
   passcode will only give the client a single opportunity to act
   maliciously. This mechanism provides authentication only.







Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 1]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


   The SECURID SASL mechanism provides a formal way to integrate the
   existing SecurID authentication method into SASL-enabled protocols
   including IMAP [RFC2060], ACAP [RFC2244], POP3 [RFC1734] and LDAPv3
   [RFC2251].

2. Authentication Model

   The SECURID SASL mechanism provides two-factor based user
   authentication as defined below.

   There are basically three entities in the authentication mechanism
   described here: A user, possessing a SecurID token, an application
   server, to which the user wants to connect, and an authentication
   server, capable of authenticating the user. Even though the
   application server in practice may function as a client with respect
   to the authentication server, relaying authentication credentials
   etc. as needed, both servers are, unless explicitly mentioned,
   collectively termed "the server" here. The protocol used between the
   application server and the authentication server is outside the scope
   of this memo. The application client, acting on behalf of the user,
   is termed "the client".

   The mechanism is based on the use of a shared secret key, or "seed",
   and a personal identification number (PIN), which is known both by
   the user and the authentication server. The secret seed is stored on
   a token that the user possesses, as well as on the authentication
   server. Hence the term "two-factor authentication", a user needs not
   only physical access to the token but also knowledge about the PIN in
   order to perform an authentication. Given the seed, current time of
   day, and the PIN, a "PASSCODE(r)" is generated by the user's token
   and sent to the server.

   The SECURID SASL mechanism provides one service:

   -    User authentication where the user provides information to the
        server, so that the server can authenticate the user.

   This mechanism is identified with the SASL key "SECURID".

3. Authentication Procedure

   a) The client generates the credentials using local information
      (seed, current time and user PIN/password).








Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 2]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


   b) If the underlying protocol permits, the client sends credentials
      to the server in an initial response message. Otherwise, the
      client sends a request to the server to initiate the
      authentication mechanism, and sends credentials after the server's
      response (see [RFC2222] section 5.1 for more information regarding
      the initial response option).

      Unless the server requests a new PIN (see below), the contents of
      the client's initial response SHALL be as follows:

      (1) An authorization identity. When this field is empty, it
      defaults to the authentication identity.  This field MAY be used
      by system administrators or proxy servers to login with a
      different user identity. This field MUST NOT be longer than 255
      octets, SHALL be terminated by a NUL (0) octet, and MUST consist
      of UTF-8-encoded [RFC2279] printable characters only (US-ASCII
      [X3.4] is a subset of UTF-8).

      (2) An authentication identity. The identity whose passcode will
      be used. If this field is empty, it is assumed to have been
      transferred by other means (e.g. if the underlying protocol has
      support for this, like [RFC2251]). This field MUST NOT be longer
      than 255 octets, SHALL be terminated by a NUL (0) octet, and MUST
      consist of UTF-8-encoded printable characters only.

      (3) A passcode. The one-time password that will be used to grant
      access. This field MUST NOT be shorter than 4 octets, MUST NOT be
      longer than 32 octets, SHALL be terminated by a NUL (0) octet, and
      MUST consist of UTF-8-encoded printable characters only.
      Passcodes usually consist of 4-8 digits.

      The ABNF [RFC2234] form of this message is as follows:

      credential-pdu = authorization-id authentication-id passcode [pin]

      authorization-id = 0*255VUTF8 %x00

      authentication-id = 0*255VUTF8 %x00

      passcode = 4*32VUTF8 %x00

      pin ::= 4*32VUTF8 %x00

      VUTF8 = <Visible (printable) UTF8-encoded characters>

      Regarding the <pin> rule, see d) below.





Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 3]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


   c) The server verifies these credentials using its own information.
      If the verification succeeds, the server sends back a response
      indicating success to the client. After receiving this response,
      the client is authenticated. Otherwise, the verification either
      failed or the server needs an additional set of credentials from
      the client in order to authenticate the user.

   d) If the server needs an additional set of credentials, it requests
      them now. This request has the following format, described in ABNF
      notation:

      server-request = passcode | pin

      passcode      = "passcode" %x00

      pin           = "pin" %x00 [suggested-pin]

      suggested-pin = 4*32VUTF8 %x00 ; Between 4 and 32 UTF-8 characters

      The 'passcode' choice will be sent when the server requests
      another passcode. The 'pin' choice will be sent when the server
      requests a new user PIN. The server will either send an empty
      string or suggest a new user PIN in this message.

   e) The client generates a new set of credentials using local
      information and depending on the server's request and sends them
      to the server. Authentication now continues as in c) above.

   Note 1: Case d) above may occur e.g. when the clocks on which the
   server and the client relies are not synchronized.

   Note 2: If the server requests a new user PIN, the client MUST
   respond with a new user PIN (together with a passcode), encoded as a
   UTF-8 string. If the server supplies the client with a suggested PIN,
   the client accepts this by replying with the same PIN, but MAY
   replace it with another one. The length of the PIN is application-
   dependent as are any other requirements for the PIN, e.g. allowed
   characters.  If the server for some reason does not accept the
   received PIN, the client MUST be prepared to receive either a message
   indicating the failure of the authentication or a repeated request
   for a new PIN. Mechanisms for transferring knowledge about PIN
   requirements from the server to the client are outside the scope of
   this memo. However, some information MAY be provided in error
   messages transferred from the server to the client when applicable.







Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 4]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


4. Examples

4.1 IMAP4

   The following example shows the use of the SECURID SASL mechanism
   with IMAP4. The example is only designed to illustrate the protocol
   interaction but do provide valid encoding examples.

   The base64 encoding of the last client response, as well as the "+ "
   preceding the response, is part of the IMAP4 profile, and not a part
   of this specification itself.

   S: * OK IMAP4 server ready
   C: A001 CAPABILITY
   S: * CAPABILITY IMAP4 AUTH=CRAM-MD5 AUTH=SECURID
   S: A001 OK done
   C: A002 AUTHENTICATE SECURID
   S: +
   C: AG1hZ251cwAxMjM0NTY3OAA=
   S: A002 OK Welcome, SECURID authenticated user: magnus

4.2 LDAPv3

   The following examples show the use of the SECURID SASL mechanism
   with LDAPv3. The examples are only designed to illustrate the
   protocol interaction, but do provide valid encoding examples.
   Usernames, passcodes and PINs are of course fictitious. For
   readability, all messages are shown in the value-notation defined in
   [X680]. <credential-pdu> values are shown hex-encoded in the
   'credentials' field of LDAP's 'BindRequest' and <server-request>
   values are shown hex-encoded in the 'serverSaslCreds' field of LDAP's
   'BindResponse'.

4.2.1 LDAPv3 Example 1

   Initial response message, successful authentication.

   C: { messageID 1,
        protocolOp bindRequest :
          { version 1,
            name '434E3D4D41474E5553'H, -- "CN=MAGNUS"
            authentication sasl :
              { mechanism '53454355524944'H, -- "SECURID"
                credentials '006d61676e757300313233343536373800'H
              }
          }
      }




Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 5]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


   S: { messageID 1,
        protocolOp bindResponse :
          { resultCode success,
            matchedDN  ''H,
            errorMessage ''H,
          }
      }

4.2.2 LDAPv3 Example 2

   Initial response message, server requires second passcode.

   C:  {
       messageID 1,
       protocolOp bindRequest : {
           version 1,
           name '434E3D4D41474E5553'H, -- "CN=MAGNUS"
           authentication sasl : {
               mechanism '53454355524944'H, -- "SECURID"
               credentials '006d61676e757300313233343536373800'H
           }
       }
   }

   S:  {
       messageID 1,
       protocolOp bindResponse : {
           resultCode saslBindInProgress,
           matchedDN  ''H,
           errorMessage ''H,
           serverSaslCreds '70617373636f646500'H
       }
   }

   C:  {
       messageID 1,
       protocolOp bindRequest : {
           version 1,
           name '434E3D4D41474E5553'H, -- "CN=MAGNUS"
           authentication sasl : {
               mechanism '53454355524944'H, -- "SECURID"
               credentials '006d61676e757300383736353433323100'H
           }
       }
   }

   S:  {
       messageID 1,



Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 6]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


       protocolOp bindResponse : {
           resultCode success,
           matchedDN  ''H,
           errorMessage ''H,
       }
   }

4.2.3 LDAPv3 Example 3

   Initial response message, server requires new PIN and passcode, and
   supplies client with a suggested new PIN (which the client accepts).

   C:  {
       messageID 1,
       protocolOp bindRequest : {
           version 1,
           name '434E3D4D41474E5553'H, -- "CN=MAGNUS"
           authentication sasl : {
               mechanism '53454355524944'H, -- "SECURID"
               credentials '006d61676e757300313233343536373800'H
           }
       }
   }

   S:  {
       messageID 1,
       protocolOp bindResponse : {
           resultCode saslBindInProgress,
           matchedDN  ''H,
           errorMessage ''H,
           serverSaslCreds '70696e006b616c6c6500'H
       }
   }

   C:  {
       messageID 1,
       protocolOp bindRequest : {
           version 1,
           name '434E3D4D41474E5553'H, -- "CN=MAGNUS"
           authentication sasl : {
               mechanism '53454355524944'H, -- "SECURID"
           credentials '006d61676e7573003837343434363734006b616c6c6500'H
           }
       }
   }

   S:  {
       messageID 1,



Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 7]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


       protocolOp bindResponse : {
           resultCode success,
           matchedDN  ''H,
           errorMessage ''H,
       }
   }

5. Security Considerations

   This mechanism only provides protection against passive eavesdropping
   attacks. It does not provide session privacy, server authentication
   or protection from active attacks. In particular, man-in-the-middle
   attacks, were an attacker acts as an application server in order to
   acquire a valid passcode are possible.

   In order to protect against such attacks, the client SHOULD make sure
   that the server is properly authenticated. When user PINs are
   transmitted, user authentication SHOULD take place on a server-
   authenticated and confidentiality-protected connection.

   Server implementations MUST protect against replay attacks, since an
   attacker could otherwise gain access by replaying a previous, valid
   request. Clients MUST also protect against replay of PIN-change
   messages.

5.1 The Race Attack

   It is possible for an attacker to listen to most of a passcode, guess
   the remainder, and then race the legitimate user to complete the
   authentication. As for OTP [RFC2289], conforming server
   implementations MUST protect against this race condition. One defense
   against this attack is outlined below and borrowed from [RFC2289];
   implementations MAY use this approach or MAY select an alternative
   defense.

   One possible defense is to prevent a user from starting multiple
   simultaneous authentication sessions. This means that once the
   legitimate user has initiated authentication, an attacker would be
   blocked until the first authentication process has completed.  In
   this approach, a timeout is necessary to thwart a denial of service
   attack.

6. IANA Considerations

   By registering the SecurID protocol as a SASL mechanism, implementers
   will have a well-defined way of adding this authentication mechanism
   to their product. Here is the registration template for the SECURID
   SASL mechanism:



Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 8]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


      SASL mechanism name:      SECURID
      Security Considerations:  See corresponding section of this memo
      Published specification:  This memo
      Person & email address to
      contact for further
      information:              See author's address section below
      Intended usage:           COMMON
      Author/Change controller: See author's address section below

7. Intellectual Property Considerations

   RSA Security Inc. does not make any claims on the general
   constructions described in this memo, although underlying techniques
   may be covered. Among the underlying techniques, the SecurID
   technology is covered by a number of US patents (and foreign
   counterparts), in particular US patent no. 4,885,778, no. 5,097,505,
   no. 5,168,520, and 5,657,388.

   SecurID is a registered trademark, and PASSCODE is a trademark, of
   RSA Security Inc.

8. References

   [RFC1734] Myers, J., "POP3 AUTHentication command", RFC 1734,
             December 1994.

   [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
             3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.

   [RFC2060] Crispin, M., "Internet Message Access Protocol - Version
             4rev1", RFC 2060, December 1996.

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

   [RFC2222] Myers, J., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer", RFC
             2222, October 1997.

   [RFC2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
             Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.

   [RFC2244] Newman, C. and J. Myers, "ACAP -- Application Configuration
             Access Protocol", RFC 2244, November 1997.

   [RFC2251] Wahl, M., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory
             Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.





Nystrom                      Informational                      [Page 9]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


   [RFC2279] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646",
             RFC 2279, January 1998.

   [RFC2289] Haller, N., Metz, C., Nesser, P. and M. Straw, "A One-Time
             Password System", RFC 2289, February 1998.

   [X3.4]    ANSI, "ANSI X3.4: Information Systems - Coded Character
             Sets - 7-Bit American National Standard Code for
             Information Interchange (7-Bit ASCII)," American National
             Standards Institute.

   [X680]    ITU-T, "Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation
             One (ASN.1): Specification of Basic Notation,"
             International Telecommunication Union, 1997.

9. Acknowledgements

   The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of various
   reviewers of this memo, in particular the ones from John Myers.  They
   have significantly clarified and improved the utility of this
   specification.

10. Author's Address

   Magnus Nystrom
   RSA Laboratories
   Box 10704
   121 29 Stockholm
   Sweden

   Phone: +46 8 725 0900
   EMail: magnus@rsasecurity.com



















Nystrom                      Informational                     [Page 10]
^L
RFC 2808             The SecurID(r) SASL Mechanism            April 2000


11.  Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Nystrom                      Informational                     [Page 11]
^L