idnits 2.17.1 draft-nandakumar-suit-secfu-requirements-00.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 (October 30, 2017) is 2370 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 Network Working Group S. Nandakumar 3 Internet-Draft C. Jennings 4 Intended status: Standards Track S. Cooley 5 Expires: May 3, 2018 Cisco 6 October 30, 2017 8 Solution Requirements - Secure Firmware Upgrade (SecFU) 9 draft-nandakumar-suit-secfu-requirements-00 11 Abstract 13 The IETF SUIT effort has been forming to define a secure firmware 14 upgrade solution for Internet of Things (IOT). Recent 15 vulnerabilities and the need to upgrade firmware on the IoT devices 16 for security updates in a standardized, secure, and automated fashion 17 has been the driving force behind this work. 19 This specification is a requirements document to aid in developing a 20 solution for Secure Firmware upgrade of the IoT devices. 22 Status of This Memo 24 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 25 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 27 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 28 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 29 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 30 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 32 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 33 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 34 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 35 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 37 This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2018. 39 Copyright Notice 41 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 42 document authors. All rights reserved. 44 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 45 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 46 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 47 publication of this document. Please review these documents 48 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 49 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 50 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 51 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 52 described in the Simplified BSD License. 54 Table of Contents 56 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 57 2. Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 58 3. IANA Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 1. Introduction 65 This draft outlines a set of requirements around firmware download 66 for IoT devices. A sketch of a proposed solution can be found in . 68 2. Solution Requirements 70 Informally, a secure firmware upgrade solution might need to address 71 following components: 73 o Secure firmware description container format, in the form of 74 Manifest 76 o Locating a server to download the firmware from 78 o Downloading the manifest and the firmware image(s) 80 o Cryptographic validation of the manifest and signed code images 82 o Complete the installation 84 Given above tasks, this specification breaks down the secure firmware 85 upgrade solution into following requirements: 87 1. Solution must allow devices that delete the old firmware before 88 installing the new firmware. Thus implying a solution that can 89 easily be implementable on a minimal boot-loader 91 2. Solution must enable devices that have enough memory to have the 92 new firmware image of the firmware simultaneously loaded with 93 the existing image. 95 3. The manifest format should be self describing. 97 4. Allow a given device to decide which manifest format is 98 appropriate for it choosing from JSON, CBOR, or perhaps ASN.1 if 99 there is a a device vendor that plans to use this 101 5. Manifest must allow metadata about the firmware sourced by a 102 single manufacturer 104 6. Optionally, the solution may allow the manifest to describe 105 metadata about firmwares from different providers 107 7. The solution should enable firmware that is delivered as a 108 single image 110 8. Optionally, the solution may enable firmware to be split into 111 multiple images. 113 9. The charter should recommend a solution agnostic to the format 114 of the firmware image and inter dependencies. Dependency 115 management is complicated and is by nature proprietary and 116 should not be in the initial scope. 118 10. The proposed solution must provide mechanism to discover where 119 to download the firmware where that mechanism includes the 120 ability for a local cache. 122 11. The proposed solution should allow flexibility to choose the 123 underlying transport protocol as defined by the deployment 124 scenarios. The WG should define a MTI set of protocols that 125 firmware servers need to implement and clients can choose which 126 one to use 128 12. The proposed solution must require a device to validate 129 signatures on the manifest and firmware image(s) 131 13. Optionally, the solution might want to support encrypted 132 manifest and firmware 134 14. The proposed solution should enable crypto agility and prevent 135 roll-back attacks. 137 15. Solution should allow for secure transition between the 138 generations of the keying material 140 16. Charter should not invent new crypto or transports and use 141 existing techniques 143 3. IANA Consideration 145 Not Applicable 147 4. Security Considerations 149 Not Applicable 151 5. Acknowledgements 153 Thanks IOTSU workshop. 155 Authors' Addresses 157 Suhas Nandakumar 158 Cisco 160 Email: snandaku@cisco.com 162 Cullen Jennings 163 Cisco 165 Email: fluffy@iii.ca 167 Shaun Cooley 168 Cisco 170 Email: scooley@cisco.com