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

Versions: 00 01

DNSOP Working Group                                          T. Pusateri
Internet-Draft                                              Unaffiliated
Intended status: Experimental                             March 24, 2019
Expires: September 25, 2019


                         Private DNS Subdomains
               draft-pusateri-dnsop-private-subdomains-01

Abstract

   This document describes a method of providing private DNS subdomains
   such that each subdomain can be shared among multiple devices of a
   single owner or group.  A private subdomain can be used for sharing
   personal services while increasing privacy and limiting knowledge of
   scarce resources.

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 September 25, 2019.

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.



Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Subdomain Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Zone Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Adding / Removing Resource Records  . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.3.  Zone Destruction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Querying Resource Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Signed Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   Section 6.6 of [RFC7558] highlights the privacy risks of DNS service
   announcements in clear text.  While there has been a long focus on
   access control to private services including the use of encryption
   and authentication through TLS [RFC8446] for connections, the DNS-SD
   announcements [RFC6763] themselves may leak private information
   including but not limited to device types and versions, enabled
   services on the device subject to attack, personal names and
   identifiers used for tracking, etc.

   Some services are meant to be advertised and used freely by devices
   on the link but other services are restricted to an owner or group
   and these services are announced publicly as a side effect of the
   current service discovery deployment.

   This document defines a method for collaborating devices to share
   private services with one another but without revealing the existence
   of these services in a public way.  This provides an additional layer
   of privacy protection for an individual's devices or those of a
   defined group sharing a common purpose.

   The additional privacy is achieved by creating private subdomains
   that require a private key for bidirectional access to DNS queries
   and responses for the zone.

   This document defines a subdomain hierarchy for providers to enable
   this feature as well as a mechanism for interoperable transfers to
   and from the subdomain.  This includes creating and destroying the
   subdomains, adding and removing records through DNS Update, and
   private authenticated queries.



Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.  These words may also appear in this
   document in lower case as plain English words, absent their normative
   meanings.

3.  Subdomain Operations

   An administrative domain provider will enable private subdomains by
   creating a base subdomain at "_pvt.<domain>."  In addition to the SOA
   and NS records, a public KEY record [RFC2535], [RFC3445] MUST be
   created at the apex which is openly available for queries.  This
   public key will be used for message encryption relating to the
   maintenance of private subdomains.

   The Zone bit for all KEY records used in this specification MUST be
   set to 0.  The protocol value for the KEY record is set to DNSSEC (3)
   and the algorithm value is taken from the available algorithms
   defined in the IANA DNS Security Algorithm Numbers.

3.1.  Zone Creation

   A subdomain is created by the owner in an administrative domain for
   which the owner has a trusted relationship.  For instance, if a user
   has services provided by an administrative domain and that user has
   been assigned a user name or account at that domain, the user could
   then uniquely claim ownership of the subdomain
   "<user>._pvt.<domain>."

   The administrative domain can use any means it finds sufficient to
   verify the trusted relationship with the user including RADIUS, AAA,
   email verification, or some other method not described here which may
   include enabling the service on a per-user basis.

   The user can then create the subdomain by sending an UPDATE [RFC2136]
   to the MNAME of the SOA record for "_pvt.<domain>." containing a new
   KEY record for the zone "<user>._pvt.<domain>."  The KEY record
   contains a public key that will later be used by the administrative
   domain to verify signed requests.  If this zone already exists, the
   UPDATE fails with RCODE YXRRSet.  If the zone does not exist, the
   user has successfully claimed the zone and all subsequent operations
   by the user will require knowledge of the private key associated with
   the registered public key in the KEY record.  The user can distribute




Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


   this private key to any or all of its devices for access to the
   private subdomain.

   In response, appropriate NS records for "<user>" will be created in
   the "_pvtr.<domain>." and a new SOA record "<user>._pvt.<domain>."
   with appropriate record fields will also be created along side the
   new KEY record submitted by the user.  The authoritative servers for
   the new "<user>._pvt.<domain>." will be managed by the administrative
   domain provider.

   At this point, the owner has knowledge of the public key of
   "_pvt.<domain>." and the administrative domain has knowledge of the
   public key of "<user>._pvt.<domain>."  All subsequent operations for
   the subdomain "<user>._pvt.<domain>." are signed with the private key
   of the sender.  The administrative domain provider can verify the
   sender should have access to the records in the private zone and the
   owner can verify the received records are authentic and haven't been
   tampered with.

3.2.  Adding / Removing Resource Records

   Once the zone is created, the user can begin adding or removing
   records to the "<user>._pvt.<domain>" subdomain through additional
   UPDATE messages for the zone.

   To ensure zone additions and deletions are from the subdomain owner,
   the UPDATE message must be signed with the owner's private key and
   the signature included in the additional data section in the form of
   a SIG(0) record [RFC2931].  More information about authenticating
   UPDATE messages can be found in [RFC3007].

   If the administrative domain provider can verify the signature with
   the subdomain owner's public key, the records are added to, or
   removed from, the "<user>._pvt.<domain>." zone.  See section 2.5.2 of
   [RFC2136] for the specifics of adding or removing records in the
   Update section.

   In order to change the KEY record at the apex of the zone, the old
   KEY record should be added to the Prerequisite section and the new
   KEY record in the Update section.  Then the message is signed with
   the subdomain owner's private key.

   This is useful for changing the algorithm or key length for the
   public/private key pair.

   If instead the private key associated with the public key in the KEY
   record has been compromised, the user should contact the




Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


   administrative domain out of band to verify authenticity and replace
   the KEY record through a process established by the provider.

3.3.  Zone Destruction

   When the owner is ready to destroy the subdomain
   "<user>._pvt.<domain>.", it can do so by deleting the KEY record at
   the apex through an UPDATE message.  As above, the UPDATE message
   additional data section MUST contain a SIG(0) signature over the
   entire message.  Once validated, the zone will be removed along with
   the NS records for "<user>" in the "_pvt.<domain>" zone.

   The owner is free to destroy and re-create the subdomain as needed
   for as long as the relationship continues with the administrative
   domain.

4.  Querying Resource Records

   Only the owner and the administrative domain provider know the true
   contents of the records.  Queries must be made through direct
   connections to an authoritative server for the subdomain over a TLS
   connection.  If the authoritative server also provides connections
   over UDP or TCP without TLS, queries for records in private zones
   over non-TLS connections MUST return an RCODE containing REFUSED.

4.1.  Signed Requests

   All queries MUST be signed with the private key of the owner.  The
   signature MUST be in the Additional records section in the form of a
   SIG(0) record.  If a query is received that is not signed or cannot
   be verified with the public key in the KEY record at the apex of the
   "<user>._pvt.<domain>.", a response containing the question as
   received with an RCODE of REFUSED with no answers MUST be returned.
   The Authority section of the response MUST contain the SOA record for
   the "<user>._pvt.<domain>."

   Authoritative servers MUST verify the signature in the query before
   returning the results.

5.  Responses

6.  Security Considerations

   The Strict Privacy Usage Profile for DNS over TLS is REQUIRED for
   connections to the authoritative name servers [RFC8310].  Since this
   is a new protocol, transition mechanisms from the Opportunistic
   Privacy profile are unnecessary.




Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


   See Section 9 of [RFC8310] for additional recommendations for various
   versions of TLS usage.

   DNSSEC is RECOMMENDED for the authentication of authoritative DNS
   servers.  TLS alone does not provide complete security.  TLS
   certificate verification can provide reasonable assurance that the
   client is really communicating with the server associated with the
   desired host name, but since the desired host name is learned via a
   DNS query, if the DNS response is subverted then the client may have
   a secure connection to a rogue server.  DNSSEC can provide added
   confidence that the response has not been subverted.

   Deployment recommendations on the appropriate key lengths and cypher
   suites are beyond the scope of this document.  Please refer to TLS
   Recommendations [RFC7525] for the best current practices.  Consider
   that best practices only exist for a snapshot in time and
   recommendations will continue to change.  Updated versions or errata
   may exist for these recommendations.

   The authoritative server connection endpoint SHOULD be authenticated
   using DANE TLSA records for the associated DNS record used to
   determine the name (SOA, SRV, etc).  This associates the target's
   name with a trusted TLS certificate [RFC7673].  This procedure uses
   the TLS Sever Name Indication (SNI) extension [RFC6066] to inform the
   server of the name the client has authenticated through the use of
   TLSA records.  Therefore, if the DNS record used to obtain the name
   passes DNSSEC validation and a TLSA record matching the target name
   is useable, an SNI extension must be used for the target name to
   ensure the client is connecting to the server it has authenticated.
   If the target name does not have a usable TLSA record, then the use
   of the SNI extension is optional.  See Usage Profiles for DNS over
   TLS and DNS over DTLS [RFC8310] for more information on
   authenticating domain names.


















Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [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>.

   [RFC2136]  Vixie, P., Ed., Thomson, S., Rekhter, Y., and J. Bound,
              "Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE)",
              RFC 2136, DOI 10.17487/RFC2136, April 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2136>.

   [RFC2535]  Eastlake 3rd, D., "Domain Name System Security
              Extensions", RFC 2535, DOI 10.17487/RFC2535, March 1999,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2535>.

   [RFC2931]  Eastlake 3rd, D., "DNS Request and Transaction Signatures
              ( SIG(0)s )", RFC 2931, DOI 10.17487/RFC2931, September
              2000, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2931>.

   [RFC3007]  Wellington, B., "Secure Domain Name System (DNS) Dynamic
              Update", RFC 3007, DOI 10.17487/RFC3007, November 2000,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3007>.

   [RFC3445]  Massey, D. and S. Rose, "Limiting the Scope of the KEY
              Resource Record (RR)", RFC 3445, DOI 10.17487/RFC3445,
              December 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3445>.

   [RFC6066]  Eastlake 3rd, D., "Transport Layer Security (TLS)
              Extensions: Extension Definitions", RFC 6066,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6066, January 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6066>.

   [RFC7525]  Sheffer, Y., Holz, R., and P. Saint-Andre,
              "Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer
              Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security
              (DTLS)", BCP 195, RFC 7525, DOI 10.17487/RFC7525, May
              2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7525>.

   [RFC7673]  Finch, T., Miller, M., and P. Saint-Andre, "Using DNS-
              Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) TLSA Records
              with SRV Records", RFC 7673, DOI 10.17487/RFC7673, October
              2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7673>.






Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft           Private DNS Subdomains               March 2019


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

   [RFC8310]  Dickinson, S., Gillmor, D., and T. Reddy, "Usage Profiles
              for DNS over TLS and DNS over DTLS", RFC 8310,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8310, March 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8310>.

   [RFC8446]  Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC6763]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
              Discovery", RFC 6763, DOI 10.17487/RFC6763, February 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6763>.

   [RFC7558]  Lynn, K., Cheshire, S., Blanchet, M., and D. Migault,
              "Requirements for Scalable DNS-Based Service Discovery
              (DNS-SD) / Multicast DNS (mDNS) Extensions", RFC 7558,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7558, July 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7558>.

Author's Address

   Tom Pusateri
   Unaffiliated
   Raleigh  NC 27608
   USA

   Phone: +1 (919) 867-1330
   Email: pusateri@bangj.com

















Pusateri               Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 8]


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