idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-lamps-8410-ku-clarifications-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (1 April 2022) is 755 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 LAMPS S. Turner 3 Internet-Draft sn3rd 4 Updates: 8410 (if approved) S. Josefsson 5 Intended status: Standards Track SJD AB 6 Expires: 3 October 2022 D. McCarney 7 Square Inc. 8 T. Ito 9 SECOM CO., LTD. 10 1 April 2022 12 Clarifications for Ed25519, Ed448, X25519, and X448 Algorithm 13 Identifiers 14 draft-ietf-lamps-8410-ku-clarifications-01 16 Abstract 18 This document updates RFC 8410 to clarify existing and specify 19 missing semantics for key usage bits when used in certificates that 20 support the Ed25519, Ed448, X25519, and X448 Elliptic Curve 21 Cryptography algorithms. 23 About This Document 25 This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. 27 Status information for this document may be found at 28 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-8410-ku- 29 clarifications/. 31 Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at 32 https://github.com/lamps-wg/8410-ku-clarifications. 34 Status of This Memo 36 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 37 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 39 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 40 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 41 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 42 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 44 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 45 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 46 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 47 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 48 This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 October 2022. 50 Copyright Notice 52 Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 53 document authors. All rights reserved. 55 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 56 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ 57 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 58 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 59 and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components 60 extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as 61 described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are 62 provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. 64 Table of Contents 66 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 67 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 68 3. New Section 5 for RFC 8410 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 69 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 71 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 72 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 73 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 74 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 75 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 77 1. Introduction 79 [RFC8410] specifies the syntax and semantics for the Subject Public 80 Key Information field in certificates that support Ed25519, Ed448, 81 X25519, and X448 Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) algorithms. As 82 part of these semantics, it defines what combinations are permissible 83 for the values of the key usage extension [RFC5280]. [RFC8410] did 84 not define what values are not permissible nor did it refer to 85 keyEncipherment or dataEncipherment. [ERRATA] has also been 86 submitted to clarify that keyCertSign is always set in certification 87 authority certificates. To address these changes, this document 88 replaces Section 5 of [RFC8410] with Section 3. 90 2. Terminology 92 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 93 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 94 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in 95 BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 96 capitals, as shown here. 98 3. New Section 5 for RFC 8410 100 The intended application for the key is indicated in the keyUsage 101 certificate extension. 103 If the keyUsage extension is present in a certificate that indicates 104 id-X25519 or id-X448 in SubjectPublicKeyInfo, then the following MUST 105 be present: 107 keyAgreement; 109 one of the following MAY also be present: 111 encipherOnly; or 112 decipherOnly; 114 and the following MUST NOT be present: 116 digitalSignature; 117 nonRepudiation; 118 keyEncipherment; 119 dataEncipherment; 120 keyCertSign; and 121 cRLSign. 123 If the keyUsage extension is present in an end-entity or CRL issuer 124 certificate that indicates id-Ed25519 or id-Ed448 in 125 SubjectPublicKeyInfo, then the keyUsage extension MUST contain at 126 least one of the following: 128 nonRepudiation; 129 digitalSignature; and 130 cRLSign; 132 and the following MUST NOT be present: 134 keyEncipherment; 135 dataEncipherment; 136 keyAgreement; 137 keyCertSign; 138 encipherOnly; and 139 decipherOnly. 141 If the keyUsage extension is present in a certification authority 142 certificate that indicates id-Ed25519 or id-Ed448 in 143 SubjectPublicKeyInfo, then the keyUsage extension MUST contain: 145 keyCertSign 147 and zero or more of the following: 149 nonRepudiation; 150 digitalSignature; and 151 cRLSign; 153 and the following MUST NOT be present: 155 keyEncipherment; 156 dataEncipherment; 157 keyAgreement; 158 encipherOnly; and 159 decipherOnly. 161 4. Security Considerations 163 This document introduces no new security considerations beyond those 164 found in [RFC8410]. 166 5. IANA Considerations 168 This document has no IANA actions. 170 6. References 172 6.1. Normative References 174 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 175 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 176 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 177 . 179 [RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., 180 Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key 181 Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List 182 (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008, 183 . 185 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 186 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 187 May 2017, . 189 [RFC8410] Josefsson, S. and J. Schaad, "Algorithm Identifiers for 190 Ed25519, Ed448, X25519, and X448 for Use in the Internet 191 X.509 Public Key Infrastructure", RFC 8410, 192 DOI 10.17487/RFC8410, August 2018, 193 . 195 6.2. Informative References 197 [ERRATA] Liao, L., "Errata 5696", 17 April 2019, 198 . 200 Acknowledgments 202 We would like to thank Russ Housley, Mike Jenkins, and Corey Bonnell 203 for the comments. 205 Authors' Addresses 207 Sean Turner 208 sn3rd 209 Email: sean@sn3rd.com 211 Simon Josefsson 212 SJD AB 213 Email: simon@josefsson.org 215 Daniel McCarney 216 Square Inc. 217 Email: daniel@binaryparadox.net 219 Tadahiko Ito 220 SECOM CO., LTD. 221 Email: tadahiko.ito.public@gmail.com