[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: 00 01 RFC 6507

Network Working Group                                             Groves
Internet Draft                                                      CESG
Intended Status: Informational                         February 28, 2011
Expires: September 01, 2011


  Elliptic Curve-based Certificate-less Signatures for Identifier Based
                           Encryption (ECCSI)
                         draft-groves-eccsi-01


Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 01, 2011.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 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
   (http://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 Simplified BSD License text as described in
   Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
   warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.






Groves                      Informational                       [Page 1]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


Abstract

   Many signature schemes currently in use rely on certificates for
   authentication of identity.  In Identifier based cryptography, this
   adds unnecessary overhead and administration.  The ECCSI signature
   scheme described in this document is certificate-less.  This scheme
   has the additional advantages of low bandwidth and low computational
   requirements.


Table of Contents

   1. Introduction.....................................................2
      1.1. Requirements Terminology....................................3
   2. Architecture.....................................................3
   3. Notation.........................................................5
      3.1. Arithmetic..................................................5
      3.2. Representations.............................................5
      3.3. Format of material..........................................6
   4. Parameters.......................................................6
      4.1. Static Parameters...........................................7
      4.2. Community Parameters........................................8
   5. Algorithms.......................................................8
      5.1. User Key Material...........................................8
         5.1.1. Algorithm for constructing (SSK,PVT) pair..............8
         5.1.2. Algorithm for validating a received SSK................9
      5.2. Signatures..................................................9
         5.2.1. Algorithm for signing..................................9
         5.2.2. Algorithm for verifying...............................10
   6. Security Considerations.........................................11
   7. IANA Considerations.............................................12
   8. References......................................................12
      8.1. Normative References.......................................12
      8.2. Informative References.....................................13
   Appendix A. Test data..............................................13


1. Introduction

   Digital signatures provide authentication services across a wide
   range of applications.  A chain of trust for such signatures is
   usually provided by certificates.  However, in low bandwidth or other
   resource constrained environments, the use of certificates might be
   undesirable.  This document describes an efficient scheme, ECCSI, for
   elliptic curve-based certificate-less signatures, primarily intended
   for use with Identifier Based Encryption (IBE) schemes such as
   [SAKKE].  As certificates are not needed, the need to transmit or
   store them to authenticate each communication is obviated.  The
   algorithm has been developed by drawing on ideas set out by Arazi
   [BA] and is originally based upon [ECDSA], one of the most commonly
   used signature algorithms.



Groves                      Informational                       [Page 2]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


   The algorithm is for use in the following context:

      where there are two parties, a Signer and a Verifier;

      where short unambiguous Identifier strings are naturally
      associated to each of these parties;

      where a message is to be signed and then verified (e.g., for
      authenticating the initiating party during an Identifier-based key
      establishment);

      where a common Key Management Server (KMS) provides a root of
      trust for both parties.

   The scheme does not rely on any web of trust between users.

   Authentication is provided in a single simplex transmission without
   per-session reference to any third party.  Thus the scheme is
   particularly suitable in situations where the receiving party need
   not be active (or even enrolled) when the message to be authenticated
   is sent, or in which the number of transmissions is to be minimized
   for efficiency.

   Instead of having a certificate, the Signer has an Identifier, to
   which his Secret Signing Key (see Section 2) will have been
   cryptographically bound by means of a Public Validation Token (see
   Section 2) by the KMS.  Unlike a traditional public key, this Public
   Validation Token requires no further explicit certification.

   The verification primitive within this scheme can be implemented
   using projective representation of elliptic curve points, without
   arithmetic field divisions, and without explicitly using the size of
   the underlying cryptographic group.


1.1. Requirements Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].


2. Architecture

   A Key Management Server (KMS) provisions key material for a set of
   communicating devices (a "user community").  Each device within the
   user community MUST have an Identifier (ID) which can be formed by
   its peers.  These Identifiers MUST be unique to devices (or users),
   and MAY change over time.  As such, all applications of this
   signature scheme MUST define an unambiguous format for Identifiers.
   We consider the situation where one device (the Signer) wishes to
   sign a message that it is sending to another (the Verifier).  Only


Groves                      Informational                       [Page 3]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


   the Signer's Identifier is used in the signature scheme.

   In advance, the KMS chooses its KMS Secret Authentication Key (KSAK),
   which is the root of trust for all other key material in the scheme.
   From this, the KMS derives the KMS Public Authentication Key (KPAK),
   which all devices will require in order to verify Signatures.  This
   will be the root of trust for verification.

   Before verification of any Signatures, members of the user community
   are supplied with the KPAK.  The supply of the KPAK MUST be
   authenticated by the KMS and this authentication MUST be verified by
   each member of the user community.  Confidentiality protection MAY
   also be applied.

   In the description of the algorithms in this document, it is assumed
   that there is one KMS, one user community, and hence one KPAK.
   Applications MAY support multiple KPAKs, and some KPAKs could in fact
   be "private" to certain communities in certain circumstances.  The
   method for determining which KPAK to use (when more than one is
   available) is out of scope.

   The KMS generates and provisions key material for each device.  It
   MUST supply a Secret Signing Key (SSK) along with a Public Validation
   Token (PVT) to all devices that are to send signed messages.  The
   mechanism by which these SSKs are provided MUST be secure, as the
   security of the authentication provided by ECCSI Signatures is no
   stronger than the security of this supply channel.

   Before using the supplied key material (SSK,KPAK) to form Signatures,
   the Sender MUST verify the key material (SSK) against the root of
   trust (KPAK) and against its own Identifier (ID) and its Public
   Validation Token (PVT) using the algorithm defined in Section 5.1.2.

   During the signing protocol, once the Signer has formed its message,
   it signs the message using its SSK.  It transmits the Signature
   (including the PVT), and MAY also transmit the message (in cases
   where the message is not known to the Verifier).  The Verifier MUST
   then use the message, Signature, and Sender ID in verification
   against the KPAK.

   This document specifies

      an algorithm for creating a KPAK from a KSAK, for a given elliptic
      curve;

      a format for transporting a KPAK;

      an algorithm for creating an SSK and a PVT from a Signer's ID,
      using the KSAK;

      an algorithm for verifying an SSK and a PVT against a Signer's ID
      and KPAK;


Groves                      Informational                       [Page 4]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011



      an algorithm for creating a Signature from a message, using a
      Signer's ID with a matching SSK and PVT;

      a format for transporting a Signature;

      an algorithm for verifying a Signature for a message, using a
      Signer's ID with the matching KPAK.

   This document does not specify (but comments on)

      how to choose a valid and secure elliptic curve;

      which hash function to use;

      how to format a Signer's ID;

      how to format a message for signing;

      how to manage and install a KPAK;

      how to transport or install an SSK.

   As used in [MIKEY-SAKKE], the elliptic curve and hash function are
   specified in Section 2.1.1 of [MIKEY-SAKKE], the format of
   Identifiers is specified in Section 3.2 of [MIKEY-SAKKE] and messages
   for signing are formatted as specified in [RFC3830].


3. Notation


3.1. Arithmetic

   ECCSI relies on elliptic curve arithmetic.  If P and Q are two
   elliptic curve points, their addition is denoted P + Q.  Moreover,
   the addition of P with itself k times is denoted [k]P.

   F_p denotes the finite field of p elements, where p is prime.  All
   elliptic curve points will be defined over F_p.

   The curve is defined by the equation y^2 = x^3 - 3*x + B modulo p,
   where B is an element of F_p.  Elliptic curve points, other than the
   group identity (0), are represented in the format P = (Px,Py), where
   Px and Py are the affine coordinates in F_p satisfying the above
   equation.  In particular, a point P = (Px,Py) is said to lie on an
   elliptic curve if Py^2 - Px^3 + 3*Px - B = 0 modulo p.  The identity
   point 0 will require no representation.


3.2. Representations



Groves                      Informational                       [Page 5]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


   This section provides canonical representations of values which MUST
   be used to ensure interoperability of implementations.  The following
   representations MUST be used for input into hash functions and for
   transmission.  In this document concatenation of octet strings s and
   t is denoted s || t.  The logarithm base 2 of a real number a is
   denoted lg(a).

   Integers           Integers MUST be represented as an octet string,
                      with bit length a multiple of 8.  To achieve this,
                      the integer is represented most significant bit
                      first, and padded with zero bits on the left until
                      an octet string of the necessary length is
                      obtained.  This is the Octet String representation
                      described in Section 6 of [RFC6090].  There will
                      be no need to represent negative integers.  When
                      transmitted or hashed, such octet strings MUST
                      have length N = Ceiling(lg(p)/8).

   F_p elements       Elements of F_p MUST be represented as integers in
                      the range 0 to p-1 using the octet string
                      representation defined above.  For use in ECCSI
                      such octet strings MUST have length N =
                      Ceiling(lg(p)/8).

   Points on E        Elliptic Curve Points MUST be represented in
                      Uncompressed representation ("affine coordinates")
                      as defined in Section 2.2 of [RFC5480].  For an
                      elliptic curve point (x,y) with x and y in F_p,
                      this representation is given by 0x04 || x' || y' ,
                      where x' is the N-octet string representing x and
                      y' is the N-octet string representing y.


3.3. Format of material

   This section describes the subfields of the different objects used
   within the protocol.

   Signature = r || s || PVT   where r and s are octet strings of length
                               N = Ceiling(lg(p)/8) representing
                               integers, and PVT is an octet string of
                               length 2N+1 representing an elliptic
                               curve point, yielding a total signature
                               length of 4N+1 octets.  (Note that r and
                               s represent integers rather than elements
                               of F_p, and therefore it is possible that
                               either or both of them could equal or
                               exceed p.)


4. Parameters



Groves                      Informational                       [Page 6]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011



4.1. Static Parameters

   The following static parameters are fixed for each implementation.
   They are not intended to change frequently, and MUST be specified for
   each user community.  Note that these parameters MAY be shared across
   multiple KMSs.

      n                  A security parameter, the size in bits of the
                         prime p over which elliptic curve cryptography
                         is to be performed.

      N = Ceiling(n/8)      The number of octets used to represent
                            fields r and s in a Signature.  Also the
                            number of octets output by the Hash Function
                            (see below).

      p                  A prime number of size n bits.  The finite
                         field with p elements is denoted F_p.

      E                  An elliptic curve defined over F_p, having a
                         subgroup of prime order q.

      B                  An element of F_p, where E is defined by the
                         formula y^2 = x^3 - 3*x + B modulo p.

      G                  A point on the elliptic curve E which generates
                         the subgroup of order q.

      q                  The prime q is defined to be the order of G in
                         E over F_p.

      Hash               A cryptographic hash function mapping arbitrary
                         strings to strings of N octets.  If a, b, c,
                         ...  are strings, then hash( a || b || c ||
                         ...) denotes the result obtained by hashing the
                         concatenation of these strings.

      Identifiers        The method for deriving user Identifiers.  The
                         format of Identifiers MUST be specified by each
                         implementation.  It MUST be possible for each
                         device to derive the Identifier for every
                         device with which it needs to communicate.  In
                         this document, ID will denote the correctly
                         formatted Identifier string of the Signer.
                         ECCSI makes use of the Signer Identifier only,
                         though an implementation MAY make use of other
                         Identifiers when constructing the message to be
                         signed.  Identifier formats MAY include a
                         timestamp to allow for automatic expiration of
                         key material.



Groves                      Informational                       [Page 7]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


   It is RECOMMENDED that p, E, and G are chosen to be standardized
   values.  In particular, it is RECOMMENDED to use the curves and
   base-points defined in [FIPS186-3].


4.2. Community Parameters

   The following community parameter MUST be supplied to devices each
   time the root of trust is changed.

      KPAK The KMS Public Authentication Key (KPAK) is the root of trust
           for authentication.  It is derived from the KSAK in the KMS.
           This value MUST be provisioned in a trusted fashion, such
           that each device that receives it has assurance that it is
           the genuine KPAK belonging to its KMS.  Before use, each
           device MUST check that the supplied KPAK lies on the elliptic
           curve E.

   The KMS MUST fix the KPAK to be KPAK = [KSAK]G, where KSAK MUST be
   chosen to be a random secret non-zero integer modulo q.  The value
   KSAK MUST be kept secret to the KMS.


5. Algorithms


5.1. User Key Material

   To create Signatures, each Signer requires a Secret Signing Key (SSK)
   and a Public Validation Token (PVT).  The SSK is an integer and the
   PVT is an elliptic curve point.  The SSK MUST be kept secret (to the
   Signer and KMS), but the PVT need not be kept secret.  A different
   (SSK,PVT) pair will be needed for each Signer ID.


5.1.1. Algorithm for constructing (SSK,PVT) pair

   The KMS constructs a (SSK,PVT) pair from the Signer's ID (ID), the
   KMS secret (KSAK), and the root of trust (KPAK).  To do this, the KMS
   MUST perform the following procedure:

      * Choose v, a random (ephemeral) non-zero element of F_q;

      * Compute PVT = [v]G (this MUST be represented canonically - see
        Section 3.2);

      * Compute HS = hash( G || KPAK || ID || PVT ), an N-octet integer;

      * Compute SSK = ( KSAK + HS * v ) modulo q;

      * If either SSK or HS is zero modulo q, the KMS MUST erase SSK and
        abort or restart the procedure with a fresh value of v;


Groves                      Informational                       [Page 8]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011



      * Output the pair ( SSK, PVT ).  The KMS MUST then erase the value
        v.

   The method for transporting the SSK to the legitimate Signer device
   is out of scope of this document, but the SSK MUST be provisioned by
   the KMS using a method that protects its confidentiality.

   If necessary, the KMS MAY create multiple (SSK,PVT) pairs for the
   same Identifier.


5.1.2. Algorithm for validating a received SSK

   Every SSK MUST be validated before being installed as a signing key.
   The Signer uses its ID and the KPAK to validate a received (SSK,PVT)
   pair.  To do this validation, the Signer MUST perform the following
   procedure, passing all checks:

      * Validate that PVT lies on the elliptic curve E;

      * Compute HS = hash( G || KPAK || ID || PVT ), an N-octet
        integer.  The integer HS SHOULD be stored with the SSK for later
        use;

      * Validate that KPAK = [SSK]G - [HS]PVT.


5.2. Signatures


5.2.1. Algorithm for signing

   To sign a message M, the Signer requires:

      the KMS Public Authentication Key, KPAK;

      the Signer's own Identifier, ID;

      its Secret Signing Key, SSK;

      its Public Validation Token, PVT = ( PVTx, PVTy ).

   These values, with the exception of ID, MUST have been provided by
   the KMS.  The value of ID is derived by the Signer using the
   community defined method for formatting Identifiers.

   The following procedure MUST be used by the Signer to compute the
   signature:

      1) Choose a random (ephemeral) non-zero value j in F_q;



Groves                      Informational                       [Page 9]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


      2) Compute J = [j]G (this MUST be represented canonically).
         Viewing J in affine coordinates J = (Jx,Jy), assign to r the
         N-octet integer representing Jx;

      3) Recall (or recompute) HS, and use it to compute HE = hash( HS
         || r || M );

      4) Verify that HE + r * SSK is non-zero modulo q; if this check
         fails, the Signer MUST abort or restart this procedure with a
         fresh value of j;

      5) Compute s' = ( (( HE + r * SSK )^-1) * j ) modulo q; the Signer
         MUST then erase the value j;

      6) If s' is too big to fit within an N-octet integer, then set the
         N-octet integer s = q - s'; otherwise set the N-octet integer s
         = s' (note that, since p is less than 2^n, by Hasse's theorem
         on elliptic curves, q < 2^n + 2^(n/2 + 1) + 1.  Therefore, if
         s' > 2^n, we have q - s' < 2(n/2 + 1) + 1.  Thus s is
         guaranteed to fit within an N-octet integer);

      7) Output the signature as Signature = ( r || s || PVT ).

   Note that the reason that step 6) is necessary is that it is possible
   for q (and hence for elements of F_q) to be too big to fit within N
   octets.  The Signer MAY instead elect to set s to be the least
   integer of s' and q - s', represented in N octets.


5.2.2. Algorithm for verifying

   The algorithm provided assumes that the Verifier computes points on
   elliptic curves using affine coordinates.  However, the Verifier MAY
   perform elliptic curve operations using any appropriate
   representation of points which achieves the equivalent operations.

   To verify a Signature ( r || s || PVT ) against a Signer's Identifier
   ID, a message M, and a pre-installed root of trust KPAK, the Verifier
   MUST perform a procedure equivalent to the following:

      1) The Verifier MUST check that PVT lies on the elliptic curve E;

      2) Compute HS = hash( G || KPAK || ID || PVT );

      3) Compute HE = hash( HS || r || M );

      4) Y = [HS]PVT + KPAK.

      5) Compute J = [s]( [HE]G + [r]Y ).

      6) Viewing J in affine coordinates (Jx,Jy), the Verifier MUST
         check that Jx = r modulo p, and that Jx modulo p is non-zero,


Groves                      Informational                      [Page 10]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


         before accepting the Signature as valid.

   It is anticipated that the Identifier (ID), message (M), and KPAK,
   will be implicitly understood due to context, but any of these values
   MAY also be included in signaling.

   Note that the parameter q is not needed during verification.


6. Security Considerations

   The ECCSI cryptographic algorithm is based upon [ECDSA].  In fact,
   step '5' in the verification algorithm above is the same as the
   verification stage in ECDSA.  The only difference between ECDSA and
   ECCSI is that in ECCSI the 'public key', Y, is derived from the
   Signer ID by the verifier (whereas in ECDSA the public key is
   fixed).  It is therefore assumed that the security of ECCSI depends
   entirely on the secrecy of the secret keys.  In addition, to recover
   secret keys one will need to perform computationally intensive
   cryptanalytic attacks.

   The KMS Secret Authentication Key (KSAK) provides the security for
   each device provisioned by the KMS.  It MUST NOT be revealed to any
   entity other than the KMS which holds it.  Each user's Secret Signing
   Key (SSK) authenticates the user as being associated with the
   Identifier (ID) to which the Secret Signing Key is assigned by the
   KMS.  This key MUST NOT be revealed to any entity other than the KMS
   and the authorized user.

   The order of the base point G used in ECCSI MUST be a large prime q.
   If k bits of symmetric security are needed, Ceiling(lg(q)) MUST be at
   least 2*k.

   It is RECOMMENDED that the curves and base-points defined in
   [FIPS186-3] are used since these curves are suitable for
   cryptographic use.  However, if other curves are used, the security
   of the curves MUST be assessed.

   In order to ensure that the Secret Signing Key is only received by an
   authorized device, it MUST be provided through a secure channel.  The
   strength of the authentication offered by this signature scheme is no
   greater than the security provided by this delivery channel.

   Identifiers MUST be defined unambiguously by each application of
   ECCSI.  Note that it is not necessary to use a hash function to
   compose an Identifier string.  In this way, any weaknesses that might
   otherwise be caused by collisions in hash functions can be avoided
   without reliance on the structure of the Identifier format.
   Applications of ECCSI MAY include a time/date component in their
   Identifier format to ensure that Identifiers (and hence Secret
   Signing Keys) are only valid for a fixed period of time.



Groves                      Informational                      [Page 11]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


   The use of the ephemeral value r in the hash HE significantly reduces
   the scope for offline attacks, improving the overall security, as
   compared to [ECDSA].  Furthermore, if Identifiers are specified to
   contain date-stamps, then all Identifiers, secret signing keys,
   signatures, and hash values will become deprecated periodically
   automatically, reducing the need for revocation and other additional
   management methods.

   The randomness of values stipulated to be selected at random as
   described in this document is essential to the security provided by
   ECCSI.  If the value of KSAK (the KMS Secret Authentication Key) can
   be predicted, then any signatures can be forged.  Similarly, if the
   value of v used by the KMS to create a user's Secret Signing Key can
   be predicted, then the value of KSAK could be recovered, which would
   allow signatures to be forged.  If the value of j used by a user is
   predictable, then the value of his Secret Signing Key could be
   recovered.  This would allow that user's signatures to be forged.
   Guidance on the generation of random values for security can be found
   in [RFC4086].

   Note that in most instances the value s in the Signature can be
   replaced by q - s.  Thus the malleability of ECCSI signatures is
   similar to that in [ECDSA]; malleability is available but yet also
   very limited.


7. IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.


8. References


8.1. Normative References

      [ECDSA]       X9.62-2005, "Public Key Cryptography for the
                    Financial Services Industry: The Elliptic Curve
                    Digital Signature Standard (ECDSA)", November,
                    2005.

      [FIPS186-3]   Federal Information Processing Standards Publication
                    (FIPS PUB) 186-3, Digital Signature Standard (DSS),
                    June 2009.

      [RFC2119]     Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                    Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

      [RFC5480]      Turner, S., Brown, D., Yiu, K., Housley, R.  and
                     T.  Polk, "Elliptic Curve Cryptography Subject
                     Public Key Information", RFC 5480, March 2009.



Groves                      Informational                      [Page 12]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


      [RFC6090]      McGrew, D., Igoe, K.  and M.  Salter, "Fundamental
                     Elliptic Curve Cryptography Algorithms", RFC 6090,
                     February 2011.


8.2. Informative References

      [BA]          Arazi, Benjamin, paper submitted to P1363 meeting,
                    August 1998, http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1363/
                    StudyGroup/contributions/arazi.doc.

      [FIPS180-3]   Federal Information Processing Standards Publication
                    (FIPS PUB) 180-3, Secure Hash Standard (SHS),
                    October 2008.

      [MIKEY-SAKKE]  Groves, M., "MIKEY-SAKKE: Sakai-Kasahara Key
                     Exchange in Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY)",
                     draft-groves-mikey-sakke-01 [work in progress],
                     February 2011.

      [RFC3830]       Arkko, J., Carrara, E., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M.,
                      and K.  Norrman, "MIKEY: Multimedia Internet
                      KEYing", RFC 3830, August 2004.

      [RFC4086]      Eastlake, D., Schiller, J., and S.  Crocker,
                     "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106,
                     RFC 4086, June 2005.

      [SAKKE]       Groves M., "Sakai-Kasahara Key Establishment
                    (SAKKE)", draft-groves-sakke-01 [work in progress],
                    February 2011.


Appendix A. Test data

   This test data is built from the NIST P256 curve and base-point.
   SHA-256 (as defined in [FIPS180-3]) is used as the hash function.
   The keys and ephemerals KSAK, v, j, are arbitrary and for
   illustration only.

      // --------------------------------------------------------
      // Global parameters

      n       := 256;
      N       := 32;

      p       := 0x   FFFFFFFF 00000001 00000000 00000000
                      00000000 FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF;

      Hash    := SHA-256;




Groves                      Informational                      [Page 13]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


      // --------------------------------------------------------
      // Community parameters

      B       := 0x   5AC635D8 AA3A93E7 B3EBBD55 769886BC
                      651D06B0 CC53B0F6 3BCE3C3E 27D2604B;

      q       := 0x   FFFFFFFF 00000000 FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF
                      BCE6FAAD A7179E84 F3B9CAC2 FC632551;

      G       := 0x   04
                      6B17D1F2 E12C4247 F8BCE6E5 63A440F2
                      77037D81 2DEB33A0 F4A13945 D898C296
                      4FE342E2 FE1A7F9B 8EE7EB4A 7C0F9E16
                      2BCE3357 6B315ECE CBB64068 37BF51F5;

      KSAK    := 0x   12345;

      KPAK    := 0x   04
                      50D4670B DE75244F 28D2838A 0D25558A
                      7A72686D 4522D4C8 273FB644 2AEBFA93
                      DBDD3755 1AFD263B 5DFD617F 3960C65A
                      8C298850 FF99F203 66DCE7D4 367217F4;

      // --------------------------------------------------------
      // Signer ID

      ID      := "2011-02\0tel:+447700900123\0",
               = 0x       3230 31312D30 32007465 6C3A2B34
                      34373730 30393030 31323300;

      // --------------------------------------------------------
      // Creating SSK and PVT

      v       := 0x   23456;
      PVT     := 0x   04
                      758A1427 79BE89E8 29E71984 CB40EF75
                      8CC4AD77 5FC5B9A3 E1C8ED52 F6FA36D9
                      A79D2476 92F4EDA3 A6BDAB77 D6AA6474
                      A464AE49 34663C52 65BA7018 BA091F79;


      HS      := hash( 0x 04
                          6B17D1F2 E12C4247 F8BCE6E5 63A440F2
                          77037D81 2DEB33A0 F4A13945 D898C296
                          4FE342E2 FE1A7F9B 8EE7EB4A 7C0F9E16
                          2BCE3357 6B315ECE CBB64068 37BF51F5
                          04
                          50D4670B DE75244F 28D2838A 0D25558A
                          7A72686D 4522D4C8 273FB644 2AEBFA93
                          DBDD3755 1AFD263B 5DFD617F 3960C65A
                          8C298850 FF99F203 66DCE7D4 367217F4
                          32303131 2D303200 74656C3A 2B343437


Groves                      Informational                      [Page 14]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


                          37303039 30303132 3300
                          04
                          758A1427 79BE89E8 29E71984 CB40EF75
                          8CC4AD77 5FC5B9A3 E1C8ED52 F6FA36D9
                          A79D2476 92F4EDA3 A6BDAB77 D6AA6474
                          A464AE49 34663C52 65BA7018 BA091F79 ),

               = 0x       490F3FEB BC1C902F 6289723D 7F8CBF79
                          DB889308 49D19F38 F0295B5C 276C14D1;


      SSK     := 0x       23F374AE 1F4033F3 E9DBDDAA EF20F4CF
                          0B86BBD5 A138A5AE 9E7E006B 34489A0D;

      // --------------------------------------------------------
      // Creating a Signature

      M       := "message\0",
               = 0x   6D657373 61676500;

      j       := 0x   34567;
      J       := 0x   04
                      269D4C8F DEB66A74 E4EF8C0D 5DCC597D
                      DFE6029C 2AFFC493 6008CD2C C1045D81
                      6DDA6A13 10F4B067 BD5DABDA D741B7CE
                      F36457E1 96B1BFA9 7FD5F8FB B3926ADB;

      r       := 0x   269D4C8F DEB66A74 E4EF8C0D 5DCC597D
                      DFE6029C 2AFFC493 6008CD2C C1045D81;

      HE      := hash( 0x
                      490F3FEB BC1C902F 6289723D 7F8CBF79
                      DB889308 49D19F38 F0295B5C 276C14D1
                      269D4C8F DEB66A74 E4EF8C0D 5DCC597D
                      DFE6029C 2AFFC493 6008CD2C C1045D81
                      6D657373 61676500 ),

               = 0x   111F90EA E8271C96 DF9B3D67 26768D9E
                      E9B18145 D7EC152C FA9C23D1 C4F02285;


      s'      := 0x   E09B528D 0EF8D6DF 1AA3ECBF 80110CFC
                      EC9FC682 52CEBB67 9F413484 6940CCFD;

      s       := 0x   E09B528D 0EF8D6DF 1AA3ECBF 80110CFC
                      EC9FC682 52CEBB67 9F413484 6940CCFD;

      Sig     := 0x   269D4C8F DEB66A74 E4EF8C0D 5DCC597D
                      DFE6029C 2AFFC493 6008CD2C C1045D81
                      E09B528D 0EF8D6DF 1AA3ECBF 80110CFC
                      EC9FC682 52CEBB67 9F413484 6940CCFD
                      04


Groves                      Informational                      [Page 15]

Internet Draft            draft-groves-eccsi-01             Feb 28, 2011


                      758A1427 79BE89E8 29E71984 CB40EF75
                      8CC4AD77 5FC5B9A3 E1C8ED52 F6FA36D9
                      A79D2476 92F4EDA3 A6BDAB77 D6AA6474
                      A464AE49 34663C52 65BA7018 BA091F79;

      // --------------------------------------------------------
      // Verifying a Signature

      Y       := 0x   04
                      833898D9 39C0013B B0502728 6F95CCE0
                      37C11BD2 5799423C 76E48362 A4959978
                      95D0473A 1CD6186E E9F0C104 B472499E
                      1A24D6CE 3D85173F 02EBBD94 5C25F604;
      J       := 0x   04
                      269D4C8F DEB66A74 E4EF8C0D 5DCC597D
                      DFE6029C 2AFFC493 6008CD2C C1045D81
                      6DDA6A13 10F4B067 BD5DABDA D741B7CE
                      F36457E1 96B1BFA9 7FD5F8FB B3926ADB;

      Jx      := 0x   269D4C8F DEB66A74 E4EF8C0D 5DCC597D
                      DFE6029C 2AFFC493 6008CD2C C1045D81;

      Jx = r  modulo p.

      // --------------------------------------------------------


   Author's Address

      Michael Groves
      CESG
      Hubble Road
      Cheltenham
      GL51 8HJ
      UK

      Email: Michael.Groves@cesg.gsi.gov.uk


Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).











Groves                      Informational                      [Page 16]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/