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

Versions: (draft-singh-stir-rph) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 RFC 8443

STIR                                                            R. Singh
Internet-Draft                                              Vencore Labs
Intended status: Standards Track                                M. Dolly
Expires: August 5, 2018                                             AT&T
                                                                  S. Das
                                                            Vencore Labs
                                                               A. Nguyen
                                   Office of Emergency Communication/DHS
                                                       February 01, 2018


         PASSporT Extension for Resource-Priority Authorization
                         draft-ietf-stir-rph-03

Abstract

   This document extends the Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (STIR)
   Personal Assertion Token (PASSporT) specification defined in
   [I-D.ietf-stir-passport] to allow the inclusion of cryptographically
   signed assertions of authorization for the values populated in the
   Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) 'Resource-Priority' header field,
   which is used for communications resource prioritization.

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 August 5, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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



Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


   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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  PASSporT 'rph' Claim  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  'rph' in SIP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Authentication Service Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  Verification Service Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Further Information Associated with 'Resource-Priority' . . .   6
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     6.1.  PASSporT Extension Claims Registration  . . . . . . . . .   6
     6.2.  'rph' Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.1.  Avoidance of replay and cut and paste attacks . . . . . .   7
     7.2.  Solution Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.3.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   PASSporT [I-D.ietf-stir-passport] is a token format based on JSON Web
   Token (JWT) [RFC7519] for conveying cryptographically signed
   information about the identities involved in personal communications;
   it is used with STIR [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis] to convey a signed
   assertion of the identity of the participants in real-time
   communications established via a protocol like SIP [RFC3261].  This
   specification extends PASSporT to allow cryptographic-signing of the
   SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field defined in [RFC4412].

   [RFC4412] defines the SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field for
   communications Resource Priority.  As specified in [RFC4412], the
   'Resource-Priority' header field may be used by SIP user agents
   [RFC3261], including Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)
   gateways and terminals, and by SIP proxy servers, to influence
   prioritization afforded to communication sessions, including PSTN
   calls.  However, the SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field could be
   spoofed and abused by unauthorized entities.




Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


   The STIR architecture [RFC7340] assumes that an authority on the
   originating side of a call provides a cryptographic assurance of the
   validity of the calling party number in order to prevent
   impersonation attacks.  The STIR architecture allows extensions that
   can be utilized by authorities supporting real-time communication
   services using the 'Resource-Priority' header field to
   cryptographically sign the SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field and
   convey assertion of the authorization for 'Resource-Priority'.  For
   example, the authority on the originating side verifying the
   authorization of a particular communication for 'Resource-Priority'
   can use a PASSPorT claim to cryptographically sign the SIP 'Resource-
   Priority' header field and convey an assertion of the authorization
   for 'Resource-Priority'.  This will allow a receiving entity
   (including entities located in different network domains/boundaries)
   to verify the validity of assertions authorizing 'Resource-Priority'.
   Cryptographically signed SIP 'Resource-Priority' header fields will
   allow a receiving entity to verify and act on the information with
   confidence that the information has not been spoofed or compromised.

   This specification documents an optional extension to PASSporT and
   the associated STIR mechanisms to provide a function to sign the SIP
   'Resource-Priority' header field.  This PASSporT object is used to
   provide attestation of a calling user authorization for priority
   communications.  This is necessary in addition to the PASSporT object
   that is used for calling user telephone number attestation.  How the
   optional extension to PASSporT is used for real-time communications
   supported using SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field is outside the
   scope of this document.

2.  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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119] and
   in RFC 8174 [RFC8174].

3.  PASSporT 'rph' Claim

   This specification defines a new JSON Web Token claim for "rph",
   which provides an assertion for information in SIP 'Resource-
   Priority' header field.

   The creator of a PASSporT object adds a "ppt" value of "rph" to the
   header of a PASSporT object, in which case the PASSporT claims MUST
   contain a "rph" claim, and any entities verifying the PASSporT object
   will be required to understand the "ppt" extension in order to
   process the PASSporT in question.  A PASSPorT header with the "ppt"
   included will look as follows:



Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


   {
   "typ":"passport",
     "ppt":"rph",
     "alg":"ES256",
     "x5u":"https://www.example.org/cert.cer"
   }

   The "rph" claim will provide an assertion of authorization, "auth",
   for information in the SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field (i.e.,
   Resource-Priority = "Resource-Priority": r-value, where r-value=
   "namespace "." priority value") based on [RFC4412].  Specifically,
   the "rph" claim includes assertion of the priority-level of the user
   to be used for a given communication session.  The value of the "rph"
   claim is an Object with one or more keys.  Each key is associated
   with a JSON Array.  These arrays contain Strings that correspond to
   the r-values indicated in the SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field.

   The following is an example "rph" claim for a SIP 'Resource-Priority'
   header field with a r-value ="namespace "." priority value" of
   "ets.0" and with another r-value= "namespace "." priority value" of
   "wps.0".

    {
     "orig":{"tn":"12155550112"},
     "dest":{["tn":"12125550113"]},
     "iat":"1443208345",
     "rph":{"auth":["ets.0", "wps.0"]}
    }

   After the header and claims PASSporT objects have been constructed,
   their signature is generated normally per the guidance in
   [I-D.ietf-stir-passport] using the full form of PASSPorT.  The
   credentials (e.g., authority responsible for authorizing Resource-
   Priority) used to create the signature must have authority over the
   namespace of the "rph" claim and there is only one authority per
   claim.  The authority MUST use its credentials (i.e., CERT)
   associated with the specific service supported by the SIP namespace
   in the claim.  If r-values are added or dropped by the intermediaries
   along the path, intermediaries must generate a new "rph" header and
   sign the claim with its own authority.

   The use of the compact form of PASSporT is not specified in this
   document.








Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


4.  'rph' in SIP

   This section specifies SIP-specific usage for the "rph" claim in
   PASSporT.

4.1.  Authentication Service Behavior

   The Authentication Service will create the "rph" claim using the
   values discussed in section 3 based on [RFC4412].  The construction
   of "rph" claim follows the steps described in Section 4 of
   [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis].

   The resulting Identity header for "rph" might look as
   follows(backslashes shown for line folding only):

      Identity:eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsInBwdCI6InJwaCIsInR5cCI6InBhc3Nwb3J0\
      IiwieDV1IjoiaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZXhhbXBsZS5jb20vY2VydC5jZXIifQo.eyJkZ\
      XN0Ijp7WyJ0biI6IjEyMTI1NTUwMTEzIl19LCJpYXQiOiIxNDQzMjA4MzQ1Iiwib3\
      JpZyI6eyJ0biI6IjEyMTU1NTUwMTEyIn0sInJwaCI6eyJhdXRoIjpbImV0cy4wIiw\
      id3BzLjAiXX19Cg.s37S6VC8HM6Dl6YzJeQDsrZcwJ0lizxhUrA7f_98oWBHvo-cl\
      -n8MIhoCr18vYYFy3blXvs3fslM_oos2P2Dyw;info=<https://www.example.\
      org/cert.cer>;alg=ES256;ppt=rph

   A SIP authentication service typically will derive the value of "rph"
   from the 'Resource-Priority' header field based on policy associated
   with service specific use of the "namespace "." priority value" for
   r-values based on [RFC4412].  The authentication service derives the
   value of the PASSPorT claim by verifying the authorization for
   'Resource-Priority' (i.e., verifying a calling user privilege for
   'Resource-Priority' based on its identity) which might be derived
   from customer profile data or from access to external services.

   [RFC4412] allows multiple "namespace "." priority value" pairs,
   either in a single SIP 'Resource-Priority' header field or across
   multiple SIP 'Resource-Priority' headers.  An authority is
   responsible for signing all the content of a SIP 'Resource-Priority'
   header field for which it has the authority.

4.2.  Verification Service Behavior

   [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis] Section 6.2 Step 5 requires that
   specifications defining "ppt" values describe any additional verifier
   behavior.  The behavior specified for the "ppt" values of "rph" is as
   follows:

   The verification service MUST extract the value associated with the
   "auth" key in a full form PASSPorT with a "ppt" value of "rph".  If
   the signature validates, then the verification service can use the



Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


   value of the "rph" claim as validation that the calling party is
   authorized for 'Resource-Priority' as indicated in the claim.  This
   value would in turn be used for priority treatment in accordance with
   local policy for the associated communication service.  If the
   signature validation fails, the verification service should infer
   that the calling party is not authorized for 'Resource-Priority' as
   indicated in the claim.  In such cases, the priority treatment for
   the associated communication service is handled as per the local
   policy.

   In addition, [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis] Section 6.2 Step 4 requires
   "iat" value in "rph" claim to be verified.

   The behavior of a SIP UA upon receiving an INVITE containing a
   PASSporT object with a "rph" claim will largely remain a matter of
   implementation policy for the specific communication service.  In
   most cases, implementations would act based on confidence in the
   veracity of this information.

5.  Further Information Associated with 'Resource-Priority'

   There may be additional information about the calling party or the
   call that could be relevant to authorization for 'Resource-Priority'.
   This may include information related to the device subscription of
   the caller, or to any institutions that the caller or device is
   associated with, or even categories of institutions.  All of these
   data elements would benefit from the secure attestations provided by
   the STIR and PASSporT frameworks.  The specification of the "rph"
   claim could entail the optional presence of one or more such
   additional information fields.

   A new IANA registry has been defined to hold potential values of the
   "rph" array; see Section 6.2.  The definition of the "rph" claim may
   have one or more such additional information field(s).  Details of
   such "rph" claim to encompass other data elements are left for future
   version of this specification.

6.  IANA Considerations

6.1.  PASSporT Extension Claims Registration

   This document registers a new "ppt" value for the "Personal Assertion
   Token (PASSporT) Extensions" table.

   o  Claim Name: "rph"

   o  Claim Description: Resource Priority Header Authorization




Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


   o  Change Controller: IESG

   o  Specification Document(s): Section 3 of [RFCThis]

6.2.  'rph' Types

   This specification also requests that the IANA creates a new registry
   for "rph" types.  Each registry entry must contain two fields: the
   name of the "rph" type and the specification in which the type is
   described.  This registry is to be initially populated with a single
   value for "auth" which is specified in [RFCThis].  Registration of
   new "rph" types shall be under the specification required policy.

7.  Security Considerations

   The security considerations discussed in [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis]
   in Section 10 are applicable here.

7.1.  Avoidance of replay and cut and paste attacks

   The PASSporT extension with a "ppt" value of "rph" MUST only be sent
   with SIP INVITE when 'Resource-Priority' header field is used to
   convey the priority of the communication as defined in [RFC4412].  To
   avoid the replay, and cut and paste attacks, the procedures described
   in Section 10.1 of [I-D.ietf-stir-rfc4474bis] MUST be followed.

7.2.  Solution Considerations

   The use of extension to PASSporT tokens with "ppt" value "rph" based
   on the validation of the digital signature and the associated
   certificate requires consideration of the authentication and
   authority or reputation of the signer to attest to the identity being
   asserted.  The following considerations should be recognized when
   using PASSporT extension with "ppt" value of "rph":

   o  An authority (signer) is only allowed to sign the content of a SIP
      'Resource-Priority' header field for which it has the right
      authority.  The authority that signs the token MUST have a secure
      method for authentication of the end user or the device.

   o  The verification of the signature MUST include means of verifying
      that the signer is authoritative for the signed content of the
      resource priority namespace in the PASSporT.








Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


7.3.  Acknowledgements

   We would like to thank STIR members, ATIS/SIP Forum Task Force on
   IPNNI members, and the NS/EP Priority Services community for
   contributions to this problem statement and specification.  We would
   also like to thank David Hancock and Ning Zhang for their valuable
   inputs.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-stir-passport]
              Wendt, C. and J. Peterson, "Personal Assertion Token
              (PASSporT)", 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)", 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>.

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.

   [RFC4412]  Schulzrinne, H. and J. Polk, "Communications Resource
              Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
              RFC 4412, DOI 10.17487/RFC4412, February 2006,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4412>.

   [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>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.







Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                PASSporT-ext                 February 2018


8.2.  Informative References

   [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>.

Authors' Addresses

   Ray P. Singh
   Vencore Labs
   150 Mount Airy Road
   New Jersey, NJ  07920
   USA

   Email: rsingh@vencorelabs.com


   Martin Dolly
   AT&T
   200 Laurel Avenue
   Middletown, NJ 07748
   USA

   Email: md3135@att.com


   Subir Das
   Vencore Labs
   150 Mount Airy Road
   New Jersey, NJ  07920
   USA

   Email: sdas@vencorelabs.com


   An Nguyen
   Office of Emergency Communication/DHS
   245 Murray Lane, Building 410
   Washington, DC 20528
   USA

   Email: an.p.nguyen@HQ.DHS.GOV








Singh, et al.            Expires August 5, 2018                 [Page 9]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/