Hypertext Transfer Protocol Authentication (httpauth)

Last modified: 2017-02-01

Additional information is available at Wiki, Issue tracker

Chairs

Security Area Advisor

Mailing Lists:

General Discussion: http-auth@ietf.org
To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-auth
Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/http-auth/

Description of Working Group:

Authentication of users to servers over HTTP has always been a weak point in web services. The current HTTP authentication mechanisms, basic and digest, pass the credentials in the clear or employ weak algorithms and are considered to be insecure today. Authentication through non-standard web forms is much more commonly used, but also pass the credentials in the clear. There is a need for improved mechanisms that can replace or augment HTTP authentication without the need to rely on transport layer security. Only HTTP authentication is in scope for this WG; form-based or "web" authentication is out of scope.

The httpauth WG will be a short-lived working group that will document a small number of HTTP user authentication schemes that might offer security benefits, and that could, following experimentation, be widely adopted as standards-track schemes for HTTP user authentication. Each of these RFCs will be Informational or Experimental, and should include a description of when use of its mechanism is appropriate, via a use-case or other distinguishing characteristics. Standards track solutions for HTTP Authentication schemes are out of scope, as none of the proposals are expected to be sufficiently widely deployed to warrant that status before the WG closes.

All schemes to be developed in the httpauth WG must be usable with the existing HTTP authentication framework, or with evolutions of that framework as developed in the httpbis WG. That is, the evolution of the HTTP authentication framework is to be done in the httpbis WG and not in the httpauth WG.

The httpauth WG will work closely with the httpbis WG to ensure that the outcomes from the httpauth WG do not conflict with work done elsewhere.

The drafts currently under consideration as WG items include:

  • draft-williams-http-rest-auth
  • draft-oiwa-http-mutualauth and draft-oiwa-http-auth-extension
  • draft-farrell-httpbis-hoba
  • draft-montenegro-httpbis-multilegged-auth
  • draft-melnikov-httpbis-scram-auth

The WG will produce two standards track documents that will obsolete the basic and digest schemes defined in RFC 2617 taking into account errata on that specification.

For the digest scheme, the new specification will incorporate "more modern" algorithm agility and internationalization support, which requires input from internationalization experts. draft-ahrens-httpbis-digest-auth-update documents one possible approach that the WG could adopt and modify as it sees fit.

For the basic scheme, no technical changes are envisaged other than to handle internationalization of usernames and passwords. The goal is to improve the scheme's documentation and to obsolete RFC 2617, which has some significant flaws that have emerged through 13 years of experience.

The WG is not required to merge all proposals into one. The goal is not to produce "perfect" mechanisms, but to review and improve proposals and to quickly produce stable specifications for the purpose of obtaining implementation and deployment experience. The working group will then close, and any further culling or refinement of the experimental mechanisms will be done in another context.

It is expected that the market/community will select which if any of the RFCs developed might be worth progressing on the standards-track at a later date, in a different WG.

Adoption of additional work items is not expected and will require a re-charter.

The following are explicitly out of scope:

  • changes to TLS
  • changes to HTTP, except for those made in the httpbis WG
  • definition of authentication mechanisms that do not work with the HTTP authentication framework
  • authentication schemes that distinguish between devices and humans
  • authentication schemes that cannot be sensibly used for and by humans
  • "web" authentication that is not HTTP authentication

Goals and Milestones

Jun 2014 Recharter or close
Feb 2014 All experimental drafts to IETF LC
Nov 2013 Begin WGLC on experimental drafts
Oct 2013 Send basic+digest to IETF LC (following WGLC, of course)
Jun 2013 Adopt -00 version of Basic and Digest update drafts (or a "basic+digest" draft - singular)
May 2013 Adopt -00 version of experimental drafts

Internet-Drafts

Request for Comments

 

Internet SocietyAMSHome - Tools Team - Datatracker - IASA - IAB - RFC Editor - IANA - IRTF - IETF Trust - ISOC - IETF Journal - Store - Contact Us
Secretariat services provided by Association Management Solutions, LLC (AMS).
Please send problem reports to: ietf-action@ietf.org.