[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: (draft-melnikov-acme-email-smime)
00 01 02 03 04 05 06
Network Working Group A. Melnikov
Internet-Draft Isode Ltd
Intended status: Informational November 1, 2019
Expires: May 4, 2020
Extensions to Automatic Certificate Management Environment for end user
S/MIME certificates
draft-ietf-acme-email-smime-06
Abstract
This document specifies identifiers and challenges required to enable
the Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) to issue
certificates for use by email users that want to use S/MIME.
Status of This Memo
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 May 4, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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 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.
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Use of ACME for issuing end user S/MIME certificates . . . . 2
3.1. ACME challenge email . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. ACME response email . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
ACME [RFC8555] is a mechanism for automating certificate management
on the Internet. It enables administrative entities to prove
effective control over resources like domain names, and automates the
process of generating and issuing certificates.
This document describes an extension to ACME for use by S/MIME.
Section 3 defines extensions for issuing end user S/MIME [RFC8550]
certificates.
2. Conventions Used in This Document
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].
3. Use of ACME for issuing end user S/MIME certificates
ACME [RFC8555] defines "dns" Identifier Type that is used to verify
that a particular entity has control over a domain or specific
service associated with the domain. In order to be able to issue
end-user S/MIME certificates, ACME needs a new Identifier Type that
proves ownership of an email address.
This document defines a new Identifier Type "email" which corresponds
to an (all ASCII) email address [RFC5321] or Internationalized Email
addresses [RFC6531]. (When Internationalized Email addresses are
used, both U-labels and A-labels [RFC5890] are allowed in the domain
part.) This can be used with S/MIME or other similar service that
requires posession of a certificate tied to an email address.
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
Any identifier of type "email" in a newOrder request MUST NOT have a
wildcard ("*") character in its value.
A new challenge type "email-reply-00" is used with "email" Identifier
Type, which provides proof that an ACME client has control over an
email address:
1. ACME server generates a "challenge" email message with the
subject "ACME: <token-part1>", where <token-part1> is the
base64url encoded [RFC4648] first part of the token, which
contains at least 64 bit of entropy. The challenge email message
structure is described in more details in Section 3.1. The
second part of the token (token-part2, which also contains at
least 64 bit of entropy) is returned over HTTPS [RFC2818] to the
ACME client.
2. ACME client concatenates "token-part1" and "token-part2" to
create "token", calculates key-authz (as per Section 8.1 of
[RFC8555]), then includes the base64url encoded SHA-256 digest
[FIPS180-4] of the key authorization in the body of a response
email message containing a single text/plain MIME body part
[RFC2045]. The response email message structure is described in
more details in Section 3.2
For an identifier of type "email", CSR MUST contain the request email
address in an extensionRequest attribute [RFC2985] requesting a
subjectAltName extension.
3.1. ACME challenge email
A "challenge" email message MUST have the following structure:
1. The message Subject header field has the following syntax: "ACME:
<token-part1>", where the prefix "ACME:" is followed by folding
white space (FWS, see [RFC5322]) and then by <token-part1> is the
base64url encoded first part of the ACME token that MUST be at
least 64 octet long after decoding. Due to recommended 78 octet
line length limit in [RFC5322], the subject line can be folded,
so whitespaces (if any) within the <token-part1> MUST be ignored.
[RFC2231] encoding of subject MUST be supported, but when used,
only "UTF-8" and "US-ASCII" charsets MUST be used (i.e. other
charsets MUST NOT be used).
2. The message MUST include the "Auto-Submitted: auto-generated"
header field [RFC3834]. The "Auto-Submitted" header field SHOULD
include "type=acme" parameter. It MAY include other optional
parameters as allowed by syntax of Auto-Submitted header field.
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
3. The message MAY contain Reply-To header field.
4. In order to prove authenticity of a challenge message, it MUST be
either DKIM [RFC6376] signed or S/MIME [RFC8551] signed. If DKIM
signing is used, the resulting DKIM-Signature header field MUST
contain the "h=" tag that includes at least "From", "Sender",
"Reply-To", "To", "CC", "Subject", "Date", "In-Reply-To",
"References", "Message-ID", "Content-Type" and "Content-Transfer-
Encoding" header fields. The message MUST also pass DMARC
validation [RFC7489], which implies DKIM and SPF validation
[RFC7208].
5. If S/MIME signing is not used to prove authenticity of the
challenge message, then the message MUST have a single text/plain
MIME body part [RFC2045], that contains human readable
explanation of the purpose of the message. If S/MIME signing is
used, then the text/plain message is used to construct a
multipart/signed or "application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=signed-
data;". Either way, it MUST use S/MIME header protection.
Example ACME "challenge" email (note that DKIM related header fields
are not included for simplicity).
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated; type=acme
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 10:08:55 +0100
Message-ID: <A2299BB.FF7788@example.org>
From: acme-generator@example.org
To: alexey@example.com
Subject: ACME: <base64url-encoded-token-with-64-octets-of-entropy>
Content-Type: text/plain
MIME-Version: 1.0
This is an automatically generated ACME challenge for email address
"alexey@example.com". If you haven't requested an S/MIME
certificate generation for this email address, be very afraid.
If you did request it, your email client might be able to process
this request automatically, or you might have to paste the first
token part into an external program.
Figure 1
3.2. ACME response email
A "response" email message MUST have the following structure:
1. The message Subject header field has the following syntax:
"<Reply-prefix> ACME: <token-part1>", where <Reply-prefix> is
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
typically the reply prefix "Re: " and the string "ACME:" is
followed by folding white space (FWS, see [RFC5322]) and then by
<token-part1>. <token-part1> is the base64url encoded first part
of the ACME token (as received in the ACME challenge) that MUST
be at least 64 octet long after decoding. Due to recommended 78
octet line length limit in [RFC5322], the subject line can be
folded, so whitespaces (if any) within the <token-part1> MUST be
ignored. [RFC2231] encoding of subject MUST be supported, but
when used, only "UTF-8" and "US-ASCII" charsets MUST be used
(i.e. other charsets MUST NOT be used).
2. The From: header field contains the email address of the user
that is requesting S/MIME certificate issuance.
3. The To: header field of the response contains the value from the
Reply-To: header field from the challenge message (if set) or
from the From: header field of the challenge message otherwise.
4. The Cc: header field is ignored if present in the "response"
email message.
5. The In-Reply-To: header field SHOULD be set to the Message-ID
header field of the challenge message according to rules in
Section 3.6.4 of [RFC5322].
6. Media type of the "response" email message is either text/plain
or multipart/alternative containing text/plain as one of the
alternatives. The text/plain body part MUST start with the line
"-----BEGIN ACME RESPONSE-----", followed by one or more line
containing base64url encoded SHA-256 digest [FIPS180-4] of the
key authorization, calculated based on token-part1 (received over
email) and token-part2 (received over HTTPS). (Note that due to
historic line length limitations in email, line endings (CRLFs)
can be freely inserted in the middle of the encoded digest, so
they MUST be ignored when processing it.). The final line of the
encoded digest is followed by the line containing "-----END ACME
RESPONSE-----". There should not be any text after the
terminating line, but if any text is found, it is ignored.
7. There is no need to use any Content-Transfer-Encoding other than
7bit for the text/plain body part, however use of Quoted-
Printable or base64 is not prohibited in a "response" email
message.
8. In order to prove authenticity of a response message, it MUST be
DKIM [RFC6376] signed. The resulting DKIM-Signature header field
MUST contain the "h=" tag that includes at least "From",
"Sender", "Reply-To", "To", "CC", "Subject", "Date", "In-Reply-
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
To", "References", "Message-ID", "Content-Type" and "Content-
Transfer-Encoding" header fields.
Example ACME "response" email (note that DKIM related header fields
are not included for simplicity).
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 11:12:00 +0100
Message-ID: <111-22222-3333333@example.com>
From: alexey@example.com
To: acme-generator@example.org
Subject: Re: ACME: <base64url-encoded-token-with-enough-entropy>
Content-Type: text/plain
MIME-Version: 1.0
-----BEGIN ACME RESPONSE-----
LoqXcYV8q5ONbJQxbmR7SCTNo3tiAXDfowy
jxAjEuX0.9jg46WB3rR_AHD-EBXdN7cBkH1WOu0tA3M9
fm21mqTI
-----END ACME RESPONSE-----
Figure 2
4. Open Issues
[[This section should be empty before publication]]
1. Do we need to handle text/html or multipart/alternative in email
challenge? Simplicity suggests "no". Also, for automated
processing it might be better to define a special MIME type that
is included as one of body parts inside multipart/mixed
container.
5. Internationalization Considerations
[RFC8616] updated/clarified use of DKIM/SPF/DMARC with
Internationalized Email addresses [RFC6531]. Please consult RFC 8616
in regards to any changes that need to be implemented.
Use of non ASCII characters in left hand sides of Internationalized
Email addresses requires putting Internationalized Email Addresses in
X.509 Certificates [RFC8398].
6. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to register a new Identifier Type "email" which
corresponds to an (all ASCII) email address [RFC5321] or
Internationalized Email addresses [RFC6531].
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
And finally, IANA is requested to register the following ACME
challenge types that are used with Identifier Type "email": "email-
reply". The reference for it is this document.
7. Security Considerations
Please see Security Considerations of [RFC8555] for general security
considerations related to use of ACME.
Security of "email-reply-00" challenge type depends on security of
email system. A third party that can can read and reply to user's
email messages (by posessing user's password or a secret derived from
it that can give read and reply access ("password equivalent"
information), or by being given permissions to act on user's behalf
using email delegation feature) can request S/MIME certificates and
is indistinguishable from the email account owner.
Email system in its turn depends on DNS. A third party that can
manipulate DNS MX records for a domain might be able to redirect
email and can get (at least temporary) read and reply access to it.
Similar considerations apply to SPF and DMARC TXT records in DNS.
Use of DNSSEC by email system administrators is recommended to avoid
easy spoofing of DNS records affecting email system.
8. Normative References
[FIPS180-4]
National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Secure
Hash Standard (SHS)", FIPS PUB 180-4, August 2015,
<https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/fips/180/4/
final>.
[RFC2045] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message
Bodies", RFC 2045, DOI 10.17487/RFC2045, November 1996,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2045>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2231] Freed, N. and K. Moore, "MIME Parameter Value and Encoded
Word Extensions: Character Sets, Languages, and
Continuations", RFC 2231, DOI 10.17487/RFC2231, November
1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2231>.
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
[RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2818, May 2000,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2818>.
[RFC2985] Nystrom, M. and B. Kaliski, "PKCS #9: Selected Object
Classes and Attribute Types Version 2.0", RFC 2985,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2985, November 2000,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2985>.
[RFC3834] Moore, K., "Recommendations for Automatic Responses to
Electronic Mail", RFC 3834, DOI 10.17487/RFC3834, August
2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3834>.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.
[RFC5321] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 5321,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5321, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5321>.
[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.
[RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.
[RFC6376] Crocker, D., Ed., Hansen, T., Ed., and M. Kucherawy, Ed.,
"DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", STD 76,
RFC 6376, DOI 10.17487/RFC6376, September 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6376>.
[RFC6531] Yao, J. and W. Mao, "SMTP Extension for Internationalized
Email", RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487/RFC6531, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6531>.
[RFC7208] Kitterman, S., "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for
Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1", RFC 7208,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7208, April 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7208>.
[RFC7489] Kucherawy, M., Ed. and E. Zwicky, Ed., "Domain-based
Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance
(DMARC)", RFC 7489, DOI 10.17487/RFC7489, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7489>.
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
[RFC8398] Melnikov, A., Ed. and W. Chuang, Ed., "Internationalized
Email Addresses in X.509 Certificates", RFC 8398,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8398, May 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8398>.
[RFC8550] Schaad, J., Ramsdell, B., and S. Turner, "Secure/
Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 4.0
Certificate Handling", RFC 8550, DOI 10.17487/RFC8550,
April 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8550>.
[RFC8551] Schaad, J., Ramsdell, B., and S. Turner, "Secure/
Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 4.0
Message Specification", RFC 8551, DOI 10.17487/RFC8551,
April 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8551>.
[RFC8555] Barnes, R., Hoffman-Andrews, J., McCarney, D., and J.
Kasten, "Automatic Certificate Management Environment
(ACME)", RFC 8555, DOI 10.17487/RFC8555, March 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8555>.
[RFC8616] Levine, J., "Email Authentication for Internationalized
Mail", RFC 8616, DOI 10.17487/RFC8616, June 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8616>.
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft ACME for S/MIME November 2019
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Thank you to Andreas Schulze, Gerd v. Egidy and James A Baker for
suggestions, comments and corrections on this document.
Author's Address
Alexey Melnikov
Isode Ltd
14 Castle Mews
Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2NP
UK
EMail: alexey.melnikov@isode.com
Melnikov Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 10]
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/