Internet-Draft | JWS-voucher | October 2022 |
Werner & Richardson | Expires 27 April 2023 | [Page] |
[RFC8366] defines a digital artifact called voucher as a YANG-defined JSON document that has been signed using a Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) structure. This memo introduces a variant of the voucher structure in which CMS is replaced by the JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) mechanism described in [RFC7515] to support deployments in which JOSE is preferred over CMS.¶
In addition to explaining how the format is created, MIME types are registered and examples are provided.¶
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 27 April 2023.¶
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
"A Voucher Artifact for Bootstrapping Protocols" [RFC8366] describes a voucher artifact used in "Bootstrapping Remote Secure Key Infrastructure" [BRSKI] and "Secure Zero Touch Provisioning" [SZTP] to transfer ownership of a device from a manufacturer to a new owner (site domain). That document defines the base YANG module and the serialization to JSON [RFC8259] with a CMS signature according to [RFC5652]. The resulting Voucher artifact has the media type "application/voucher-cms+json".¶
[I-D.ietf-anima-constrained-voucher] provides a mapping of the YANG module to CBOR [RFC8949] with a signature format of COSE [RFC8812].¶
This document provides a mapping of the Voucher YANG module to JSON format with the signature in form of JSON Web Signature (JWS) [RFC7515]. The encoding specified in this document is used by [I-D.ietf-anima-brski-prm] and may be more handy for use cases requiring signed JSON objects.¶
This document does not extend the YANG definition of [RFC8366].¶
With the availability of different encoded vouchers, it is up to an industry specific application statement to indicate/decide which voucher signature format is to be used. There is no provision across the different voucher signature formats that a receiver could safely recognize which format it uses unless additional context is provided. For example, [BRSKI] provides this context via the MIME-Type for the voucher artifact. +++ stf: Is this a reference to the optional usage of "typ" in the voucher? Proposal to include: This document utilizes the optional "type" in the signature to provide information about the signed object.¶
This document should be considered an update to [RFC8366] in the category of "See Also" as per [I-D.kuehlewind-update-tag].¶
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.¶
The voucher [RFC8366] JSON structure consists of a nested map, the outer part of which is:¶
{ "ietf-voucher:voucher" : { some inner items }}¶
this is considered the JSON payload as described in [RFC7515] section 3.¶
[RFC7515] section 3.2 provides "JWS JSON Serialization Overview", find more details in [RFC7515] section 7 "Serializations".
The following serializations are defined:¶
This document makes use of the "General JWS JSON Serialization Syntax" to support multiple signatures, as already supported by [RFC8366] for vouchers in form of "voucher-cms+json".¶
The following figures gives an overview of the Voucher representation in "General JWS JSON Serialization Syntax".¶
The following figures gives the decoded voucher payload representation JSON syntax.¶
The standard header parameters "typ" and "alg" as described in [RFC7515] are utilized in the protected header. The "alg" header MUST contain the algorithm type used to create the signature, such as "ES256". The "typ" header SHOULD contain the value "TODO: voucher-jws+json", if present.¶
If PKIX [RFC5280] format certificates are used then the [RFC7515] section 4.1.6 "x5c"
certificate chain SHOULD be used to contain the certificate and chain.
Vouchers will often need all certificates in the chain,
including what would be considered the trust anchor certificate
because intermediate devices (such as the Registrar) may need to audit the artifact,
or end systems may need to pin a trust anchor for future operations.
Note, a trust anchor SHOULD be provided differntly to be trusted.
This is consistent with [BRSKI] section 5.5.2.¶
The following figure gives the decoded protected header representation in JSON syntax.¶
The Voucher Request reveals the IDevID of the component (Pledge) that is in the process of bootstrapping.¶
This request occurs via HTTP-over-TLS, however the Pledge to Registrar TLS connection the Pledge is provisinally accepting the Registrar server certificate, and it is subject to disclosure by a Dolev-Yao attacker (a "malicious messenger")[onpath]. This is explained in [BRSKI] section 10.2.¶
The use of a JWS header brings no new privacy considerations.¶
The issues of how [RFC8366] vouchers are used in a [BRSKI] system is addressed in section 11 of the [BRSKI] specification. This document does not change any of those issues, it just changes the signature technology used for voucher request and response objects.¶
[SZTP] section 9 deals with voucher use in Secure Zero Touch Provisioning, and this document also makes no changes to security.¶
This section registers the 'application/voucher-jws+json' in the "Media Types" registry.¶
Type name: application Subtype name: voucher-jws+json Required parameters: none Optional parameters: none Encoding considerations: JWS+JSON vouchers are JOSE objects signed with one or multiple signers. Security considerations: See section [Security Considerations] Interoperability considerations: The format is designed to be broadly interoperable. Published specification: [THIS RFC]. Applications that use this media type: ANIMA, 6tisch, and other zero-touch bootstrapping/provisioning solutions Additional information: Magic number(s): None File extension(s): .vjj Macintosh file type code(s): none Person & email address to contact for further information: IETF ANIMA WG Intended usage: LIMITED Restrictions on usage: NONE Author: ANIMA WG Change controller: IETF Provisional registration? (standards tree only): NO¶
We would like to thank the various reviewers for their input, in particular Steffen Fries, Ingo Wenda, ...TODO Support in PoC implementations Hong Rui Li and He Peng Jia, ...TODO¶
[RFC Editor: please delete] TODO: ...¶
-- back¶
These examples are folded according to [RFC8792] Single Backslash rule.¶
The following is an example request sent from a Pledge to the Registrar, in "General JWS JSON Serialization".¶
The term parboiled refers to food which is partially cooked. In [BRSKI], the term refers to a Pledge voucher-request (PVR) which has been received by the Registrar, and then has been processed by the Registrar ("cooked"), and is now being forwarded to the MASA.¶
The following is an example Registrar voucher-request (RVR) sent from the Registrar to the MASA, in "General JWS JSON Serialization". Note that the previous PVR can be seen in the payload as "prior-signed-voucher-request".¶
The following is an example voucher response from MASA to Pledge via Registrar, in "General JWS JSON Serialization".¶