[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-barnes-acme-service-provider) 00 01

Network Working Group                                          M. Barnes
Internet-Draft                               MLB@Realtime Communications
Intended status: Informational                                  C. Wendt
Expires: January 19, 2018                                        Comcast
                                                           July 18, 2017


       ACME Identifiers and Challenges for VoIP Service Providers
                  draft-ietf-acme-service-provider-01

Abstract

   This document specifies identifiers and challenges required to enable
   the Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) to issue
   certificates for VoIP service providers to support Secure Telephony
   Identity (STI).

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 http://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 January 19, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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.



Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Identifier for Service Provider Codes . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Challenges for Service Providers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.1.  ACME TNAuthList Identifier  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.2.  ACME Service Provider Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   [I-D.ietf-acme-acme] 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.

   The STIR problem statement [RFC7340] identifies the need for Internet
   credentials that can attest authority for the originator of VoIP
   calls in order to detect impersonation, which is currently an enabler
   for common attacks associated with illegal robocalling, voicemail
   hacking, and swatting.  These credentials are used to sign PASSporTs
   [I-D.ietf-stir-passport], which can be carried in using protocols
   such as SIP [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis].  Currently, the only defined
   credentials for this purpose are the certificates specified in
   [I-D.ietf-stir-certificates].

   [I-D.ietf-stir-certificates] describes certificate extensions
   suitable for associating telephone numbers and service provider codes
   with certificates.  [I-D.ietf-acme-telephone] specifies the ACME
   extensions to enable certification authorities to issue certificates
   based on telephone numbers.  This specification defines extensions to
   ACME to enable certification authorities to issue certificates based
   on service provider codes.

2.  Overview

   The document [ATIS-1000080] provides a framework and model for using
   certificates based on service provider codes.  In this model, each
   service provider requires only a few certificates, which are used in
   conjunction with a PASSporT that contains additional information
   attesting to a service provider's knowledge of the originator of the
   call.  Further details on the PASSporT extensions for this model are
   provided in the SHAKEN Framework [ATIS-1000074].




Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


   In the SHAKEN Certificate Management framework [ATIS-1000080], there
   is an administrative entity that is responsible for allocating
   service provider codes.  This is referred to as the STI Policy
   Administrator (STI-PA).  This allows a certification authority to
   validate that the entity requesting issuance of a certificate is
   authorized to request certificates on behalf of the entity that has
   been assigned a specific service provider code.  A single VoIP
   service provider can be allocated multiple service provider codes.  A
   service provider can choose to use the same certificate for multiple
   service providers as reflected by the structure of the TN
   Authorization List certificate extension defined in
   [I-D.ietf-stir-certificates].

   The intent of the challenges in this document is not to establish
   that an entity is a valid service provider but rather to provide
   evidence that an established governance entity has authorized the
   entity to provide VoIP services in the network and thus to request
   credentials on behalf of the VoIP users in the network.

3.  Identifier for Service Provider Codes

   In order to issue certificates for service providers based on service
   provider code values, a new ACME identifier type is required for use
   in ACME authorization objects.  The baseline ACME specification
   defines one type of identifier, for a fully-qualified domain name
   ("dns").  The document [I-D.ietf-acme-telephone] defines an ACME
   identifier type for telephone numbers ("tn").  This document defines
   a new ACME identifier type for service provider codes ("TNAuthList").
   The "TNAuthList" identifier is the same type that is specified in the
   TN Authorization List certificate extension
   [I-D.ietf-stir-certificates] for service provider codes.

4.  Challenges for Service Providers

   The new "TNAuthList" identifier introduces a slightly different
   authorization process.  A mechanism is required to allow the service
   provider to prove it has the authority to request certificates on
   behalf of the entities for whom it is providing VoIP services.  This
   document defines a new ACME challenge type of "spc-token-01" to
   support the authorization of service provider code tokens.

   The following is the response that the ACME client receives when it
   sends a GET for the challenges in the case of a "TNAuthList"
   identifer:







Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Type: application/json
   Link: <https://example.com/acme/some-directory>;rel="directory"

   {
     "status": "pending",

     "identifier": {
        "type": "TNAuthList",
        "value": ["1234-0111"]
      },

      "challenges": [
      {
        "type": "spc-token-01",
        "url": "https://sti-ca.com/authz/asdf/0"
        "token": "DGyRejmCefe7v4NfDGDKfA" }
      ],
   }

   A client responds to this challenge by providing a service provider
   code token.  In the SHAKEN Certificate Management framework, the
   Service Provider has a secure exchange with the STI-PA to obtain a
   service provider code token that can be used for authorization by the
   CA when requesting a certificate.  The service provider code token is
   a standard JWT token [RFC7519] using a JWS defined signature string
   [RFC7515].

   The service provider code token JWT Protected Header MUST include the
   following:



      alg:  Defines the algorithm used in the signature of the token.
         For Service Provider Code tokens, the algorithm MUST be
         "ES256".

      typ:  Set to standard "JWT" value.

      x5u:  Defines the URL of the certificate of the STI-PA validating
         the Service Provider Code.

   The service provide code token JWT Payload MUST include the
   following:







Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


      sub:  Service Provider Code value being validated in the form of a
         JSON array of ASCII strings.

      iat:  DateTime value of the time and date the token was issued.

      nbf:  DateTime value of the starting time and date that the token
         is valid.

      exp:  DateTime value of the ending time and date that the token
         expires.

      fingerprint:  : Fingerprint of the ACME credentials the Service
         Provider used to create an account with the CA.  The
         fingerprint is of the form:
         base64url(JWK_Thumbprint(accountKey)).

         The "JWK_Thumbprint" step indicates the computation specified
         in [RFC7638], using the SHA-256 digest [FIPS180-4].  As noted
         in JWA [RFC7518] any prepended zero octets in the JWK object
         MUST be stripped before doing the computation.

   To respond to a service provider code token challenge, the ACME
   client constructs a service provider code authorization ("spc-authz")
   using the "token" value provided in the challenge and the service
   provider code token ("spcAuthzToken") that has been previously
   obtained from the STI-PA.  These two values are concatenated and
   separated by a "." character as follows:

   spcAuthorization = token || '.' || spcAuthzToken

   The token for a challenge is a string comprised entirely of
   characters in the URL- safe base64 alphabet.  The "||" operator
   indicates concatenation of strings.

   An example of the use of the "spc-token-01" in a challenge response
   sent by the ACME client is provided below:















Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


           POST /acme/authz/asdf/0 HTTP/1.1
           Host: sti-ca.com
           Content-Type: application/jose+json

           {
            "protected": base64url({
            "alg": "ES256",
            "kid": "https://sti-ca.com/acme/reg/asdf",
            "nonce": "Q_s3MWoqT05TrdkM2MTDcw",
            "url": "https://sti-ca.com/acme/authz/asdf/0"
           }),
            "payload": base64url({
            "spcAuthorization": "DGyRejmCefe7v4N...vb29HhjjLPSggwiE"
           }),
            "signature": "9cbg5JO1Gf5YLjjz...SpkUfcdPai9uVYYQ"
           }



   Upon receiving a response to the challenge, the ACME server
   determines the validity of the response.  The ACME server MUST verify
   that the "token" in the response matches the "token" in the original
   challenge.  To determine if the "spcAuthzToken" is valid, the server
   MUST use the URL in the JWT header in the "spcAuthzToken" to obtain
   the certificate associated with the JWT payload.  The server MUST
   validate the signature and verify the claims.  The "sub" field MUST
   be a value that is included in the values for the "TN-Auth-List" in
   the original challenge.  The server MUST verify that the
   "fingerprint" field matches the ACME credentials for the ACME client
   that created the account with the CA.  If the validation is
   successful, the "status" in the challenge object is set to "valid".
   If any step of the validation process fails, the "status" in the
   challenge object MUST be set to "invalid".  [Editor's Note: Likely we
   should describe specific error responses for the above.]

5.  IANA Considerations

   This document defines a new ACME Identifier type and ACME Challenge
   type to be registered.

   [[ RFC EDITOR: Please replace XXXX above with the RFC number assigned
   to this document ]]

5.1.  ACME TNAuthList Identifier

   This document defines the "TNAuthList" ACME Challenge type in the
   ACME Identifier Type registry as follows:




Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


                  +-----------------------+-----------+
                  | Identifier Type       | Reference |
                  +-----------------------+-----------+
                  | TNAuthList            | RFC XXXX  |
                  +-----------------------+-----------+



5.2.  ACME Service Provider Challenge

   This document defines the "spc-token-01" ACME Challenge type in the
   ACME Challenge Types registry as follows:

                  +--------------+--------------------+-----------+
                  | Label        | Identifier Type    | Reference |
                  +--------------+--------------------+-----------+
                  | spc-token-01 | TNAuthList         | RFC XXXX  |
                  +--------------+--------------------+-----------+



6.  Security Considerations

   This document relies on the security considerations established for
   the ACME protocol per [I-D.ietf-acme-acme].  The new "TNAuthList"
   identifier and "spc-token-01" validation challenges introduce a
   slightly different authorization process.  Although, the challenges
   still have a binding between the account private key and the
   validation query made by the server since the fingerprint of the
   account key is contained in the service provider code token used for
   authorization.

   The service provider code token is initially obtained through a
   secure exchange between the service provider and the entity in the
   network that is responsible for determining what entities can operate
   as VoIP service providers (the STI Policy Administrator).  Further
   details on this are provided in [ATIS-1000080].

7.  Informative References

   [ATIS-1000074]
              ATIS/SIP Forum NNI Task Group, "Signature-based Handling
              of Asserted information using toKENs (SHAKEN)", January
              2017.







Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


   [ATIS-1000080]
              ATIS/SIP Forum NNI Task Group, "Signature-based Handling
              of Asserted information using toKENs (SHAKEN): Governance
              Model and Certificate Management", May 2017.

   [FIPS180-4]
              Department of Commerce, National, "NIST FIPS 180-4, Secure
              Hash Standard", March 2012.

   [I-D.ietf-acme-acme]
              Barnes, R., Hoffman-Andrews, J., and J. Kasten, "Automatic
              Certificate Management Environment (ACME)", draft-ietf-
              acme-acme-07 (work in progress), June 2017.

   [I-D.ietf-acme-telephone]
              Peterson, J. and R. Barnes, "ACME Identifiers and
              Challenges for Telephone Numbers", draft-ietf-acme-
              telephone-00 (work in progress), July 2017.

   [I-D.ietf-stir-certificates]
              Peterson, J. and S. Turner, "Secure Telephone Identity
              Credentials: Certificates", draft-ietf-stir-
              certificates-14 (work in progress), May 2017.

   [I-D.ietf-stir-passport]
              Wendt, C. and J. Peterson, "Personal Assertion Token
              (PASSporT)", draft-ietf-stir-passport-11 (work in
              progress), February 2017.

   [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis]
              Peterson, J., Jennings, C., Rescorla, E., and C. Wendt,
              "Authenticated Identity Management in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", draft-ietf-stir-rfc4474bis-16
              (work in progress), February 2017.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC7340]  Peterson, J., Schulzrinne, H., and H. Tschofenig, "Secure
              Telephone Identity Problem Statement and Requirements",
              RFC 7340, DOI 10.17487/RFC7340, September 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7340>.

   [RFC7515]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web
              Signature (JWS)", RFC 7515, DOI 10.17487/RFC7515, May
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7515>.



Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft Service Provider Identifier and Challenges      July 2017


   [RFC7518]  Jones, M., "JSON Web Algorithms (JWA)", RFC 7518,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7518, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7518>.

   [RFC7519]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
              (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.

   [RFC7638]  Jones, M. and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Key (JWK)
              Thumbprint", RFC 7638, DOI 10.17487/RFC7638, September
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7638>.

Authors' Addresses

   Mary Barnes
   MLB@Realtime Communications

   Email: mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com


   Chris Wendt
   Comcast
   One Comcast Center
   Philadelphia, PA  19103
   US

   Email: chris-ietf@chriswendt.net
























Barnes & Wendt          Expires January 19, 2018                [Page 9]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.124, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/