Internet-Draft MUST NOT DNSSEC with ECC-GOST July 2024
Hardaker & Kumari Expires 8 January 2025 [Page]
Workgroup:
Network Working Group
Internet-Draft:
draft-hardaker-dnsop-must-not-ecc-gost-02
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
W. Hardaker
USC/ISI
W. Kumari
Google

Remove deprecated GOST algorithms from active use within DNSSEC

Abstract

This document retires the use of ECC-GOST within DNSSEC.

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 8 January 2025.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

The use of the GOST R 34.10-2001 and GOST R 34.11-94 algorithms with the DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) [RFC9364] was documented in [RFC5933]. These two algorithms were deprecated by the Orders of the Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology of Russia (Rosstandart) in August 2012, and were superseded by GOST 34.10-2012 and GOST 34.11-2012 respectively. The use of GOST 34.10-2012 and GOST 34.11-2012 in DNSSEC is documented in [RFC9558], and so [RFC5933] has been made Historic.

Thus, the use of GOST R 34.10-2001 (mnemonic GOST-ECC) and and GOST R 34.11-94 is no not recommend for use in DNSSEC [RFC9364].

Note that this document does not change or discuss the use of GOST 34.10-2012 and GOST 34.11-2012.

1.1. 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.

2. Deprecating ECC-GOST algorithms in DNSSEC

The GOST R 34.11-94 [RFC5933] algorithm MUST NOT be used when creating DS records. Validating resolvers MUST treat GOST R 34.11-94 DS records as insecure. If no other DS records of accepted cryptographic algorithms are available, the DNS records below the delegation point MUST be treated as insecure.

The ECC-GOST [RFC5933] algorithm MUST NOT be used when creating DNSKEY and RRSIG records. Validating resolvers MUST treat RRSIG records created from DNSKEY records using these algorithms as an unsupported algorithm. If no other RRSIG records of accepted cryptographic algorithms are available, the validating resolver MUST consider the associated resource records as Insecure.

3. Security Considerations

This document increases the security of the DNSSEC ecosystem by deprecating algorithms that make use of older algorithms with ECC-GOST derived uses.

4. Operational Considerations

Zone owners currently making use of ECC-GOST based algorithms should immediate switch to algorithms with stronger cryptographic strengths. DNS registries [RFC8499] should prohibit their clients to upload and publish ECC-GOST based DS records.

5. IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to set the "Use for DNSSEC Signing", "Use for DNSSEC Validation", "Implement for DNSSEC Signing", and "Implement for DNSSEC Validation" columns of the DNS Security Algorithm Numbers registry [DNSKEY-IANA] for ECC-GOST (23) to MUST NOT. Note that previously the "Use for DNSSEC Signing" and "Implement for DNSSEC Delegation" columns were already MUST NOT.

IANA is requested to set the "Use for DNSSEC Delegation", "Use for DNSSEC Validation", "Implement for DNSSEC Delegation", and "Implement for DNSSEC Validation" columns of the "Digest Algorithms" registry [DS-IANA] for GOST R 34.11-94 (3) to MUST NOT. Note that previously the "Use for DNSSEC Signing" and "Implement for DNSSEC Delegation" columns were already MUST NOT.

6. References

6.1. Normative References

[DNSKEY-IANA]
IANA, "Domain Name System Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Numbers", n.d., <https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers/dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml>.
[DS-IANA]
IANA, "Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest Algorithms", n.d., <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ds-rr-types>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC5933]
Dolmatov, V., Ed., Chuprina, A., and I. Ustinov, "Use of GOST Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource Records for DNSSEC", RFC 5933, DOI 10.17487/RFC5933, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5933>.
[RFC9364]
Hoffman, P., "DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC)", BCP 237, RFC 9364, DOI 10.17487/RFC9364, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9364>.

6.2. Informative References

[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC8499]
Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS Terminology", RFC 8499, DOI 10.17487/RFC8499, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8499>.
[RFC9558]
Makarenko, B. and V. Dolmatov, Ed., "Use of GOST 2012 Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource Records for DNSSEC", RFC 9558, DOI 10.17487/RFC9558, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9558>.

Appendix A. Acknowledgments

TBD

Appendix B. Current algorithm usage levels

The DNSSEC scanning project by Viktor Dukhovni and Wes Hardaker highlights the current deployment of various algorithms on the https://stats.dnssec-tools.org/ website.

<RFC Editor: please delete this section upon publication>

Appendix C. Github Version of this document

While this document is under development, it can be viewed, tracked, fill here:

https://github.com/hardaker/draft-hardaker-dnsop-must-not-gost

Authors' Addresses

Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI
Warren Kumari
Google