draft-ietf-rats-yang-tpm-charra-10.txt   draft-ietf-rats-yang-tpm-charra-11.txt 
RATS Working Group H. Birkholz RATS Working Group H. Birkholz
Internet-Draft M. Eckel Internet-Draft M. Eckel
Intended status: Standards Track Fraunhofer SIT Intended status: Standards Track Fraunhofer SIT
Expires: 13 February 2022 S. Bhandari Expires: 27 February 2022 S. Bhandari
ThoughtSpot ThoughtSpot
E. Voit E. Voit
B. Sulzen B. Sulzen
Cisco Cisco
L. Xia L. Xia
Huawei Huawei
T. Laffey T. Laffey
HPE HPE
G. Fedorkow G. Fedorkow
Juniper Juniper
12 August 2021 26 August 2021
A YANG Data Model for Challenge-Response-based Remote Attestation A YANG Data Model for Challenge-Response-based Remote Attestation
Procedures using TPMs Procedures using TPMs
draft-ietf-rats-yang-tpm-charra-10 draft-ietf-rats-yang-tpm-charra-11
Abstract Abstract
This document defines YANG RPCs and a small number of configuration This document defines YANG RPCs and a small number of configuration
nodes required to retrieve attestation evidence about integrity nodes required to retrieve attestation evidence about integrity
measurements from a device, following the operational context defined measurements from a device, following the operational context defined
in TPM-based Network Device Remote Integrity Verification. in TPM-based Network Device Remote Integrity Verification.
Complementary measurement logs are also provided by the YANG RPCs, Complementary measurement logs are also provided by the YANG RPCs,
originating from one or more roots of trust for measurement (RTMs). originating from one or more roots of trust for measurement (RTMs).
The module defined requires at least one TPM 1.2 or TPM 2.0 as well The module defined requires at least one TPM 1.2 or TPM 2.0 as well
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 13 February 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on 27 February 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. The YANG Module for Basic Remote Attestation Procedures . . . 3 2. The YANG Module for Basic Remote Attestation Procedures . . . 4
2.1. YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. YANG Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.1. 'ietf-tpm-remote-attestation' . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1.1. 'ietf-tpm-remote-attestation' . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.2. 'ietf-tcg-algs' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.1.2. 'ietf-tcg-algs' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document is based on the general terminology defined in the This document is based on the general terminology defined in the
[I-D.ietf-rats-architecture] and uses the operational context defined [I-D.ietf-rats-architecture] and uses the operational context defined
in [I-D.ietf-rats-tpm-based-network-device-attest] as well as the in [I-D.ietf-rats-tpm-based-network-device-attest] as well as the
interaction model and information elements defined in interaction model and information elements defined in
[I-D.ietf-rats-reference-interaction-models]. The currently [I-D.ietf-rats-reference-interaction-models]. The currently
supported hardware security modules (HSMs) are the Trusted Platform supported hardware security modules (HSMs) are the Trusted Platform
Modules (TPMs) [TPM1.2] and [TPM2.0] as specified by the Trusted Modules (TPMs) [TPM1.2] and [TPM2.0] as specified by the Trusted
skipping to change at page 5, line 13 skipping to change at page 6, line 5
+--ro TPM_QUOTE2? binary +--ro TPM_QUOTE2? binary
2.1.1.3.2. 'tpm20-challenge-response-attestation' 2.1.1.3.2. 'tpm20-challenge-response-attestation'
This RPC allows a Verifier to request signed TPM PCRs (_TPM Quote_ This RPC allows a Verifier to request signed TPM PCRs (_TPM Quote_
operation) from a TPM 2.0 compliant cryptoprocessor. Where the operation) from a TPM 2.0 compliant cryptoprocessor. Where the
feature 'TPMs' is active, and one or more 'certificate-name' is not feature 'TPMs' is active, and one or more 'certificate-name' is not
provided, all TPM 2.0 compliant cryptoprocessors will respond. A provided, all TPM 2.0 compliant cryptoprocessors will respond. A
YANG tree diagram of this RPC is as follows: YANG tree diagram of this RPC is as follows:
+---x tpm20-challenge-response-attestation {taa:TPM20}? +---x tpm20-challenge-response-attestation {taa:tpm}?
+---w input +---w input
| +---w tpm20-attestation-challenge | +---w tpm20-attestation-challenge
| +---w nonce-value binary | +---w nonce-value binary
| +---w tpm20-pcr-selection* [] | +---w tpm20-pcr-selection* []
| | +---w TPM20-hash-algo? identityref | | +---w TPM20-hash-algo? identityref
| | +---w pcr-index* tpm:pcr | | +---w pcr-index* tpm:pcr
| +---w certificate-name* certificate-name-ref {tpm:TPMs}? | +---w certificate-name* certificate-name-ref {tpm:TPMs}?
+--ro output +--ro output
+--ro tpm20-attestation-response* [] +--ro tpm20-attestation-response* []
+--ro certificate-name certificate-name-ref +--ro certificate-name certificate-name-ref
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
+--ro up-time? uint32 +--ro up-time? uint32
+--ro unsigned-pcr-values* [] +--ro unsigned-pcr-values* []
+--ro TPM20-hash-algo? identityref +--ro TPM20-hash-algo? identityref
+--ro pcr-values* [pcr-index] +--ro pcr-values* [pcr-index]
+--ro pcr-index pcr +--ro pcr-index pcr
+--ro pcr-value? binary +--ro pcr-value? binary
An example of an RPC challenge requesting PCRs 0-7 from a SHA-256 An example of an RPC challenge requesting PCRs 0-7 from a SHA-256
bank could look like the following: bank could look like the following:
<rpc message-id="101" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> <rpc message-id="101" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<tpm20-challenge-response-attestation> <tpm20-challenge-response-attestation>
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tpm-remote-attestation"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tpm-remote-attestation">
<certificate-name> <certificate-name>
(identifier of a TPM signature key with which the Verifier is supposed (identifier of a TPM signature key with which the Verifier is
to sign the attestation data) supposed to sign the attestation data)
</certificate-name> </certificate-name>
<nonce> <nonce>
0xe041307208d9f78f5b1bbecd19e2d152ad49de2fc5a7d8dbf769f6b8ffdeab9d 0xe041307208d9f78f5b1bbecd19e2d152ad49de2fc5a7d8dbf769f6b8ffdeab9
</nonce> </nonce>
<tpm20-pcr-selection> <tpm20-pcr-selection>
<tpm20-hash-algo <tpm20-hash-algo
xmlns:taa="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcg-algs"> xmlns:taa="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcg-algs">
taa:TPM_ALG_SHA256 taa:TPM_ALG_SHA256
</tpm20-hash-algo> </tpm20-hash-algo>
<pcr-index>0</pcr-index> <pcr-index>0</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>1</pcr-index> <pcr-index>1</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>2</pcr-index> <pcr-index>2</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>3</pcr-index> <pcr-index>3</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>4</pcr-index> <pcr-index>4</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>5</pcr-index> <pcr-index>5</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>6</pcr-index> <pcr-index>6</pcr-index>
<pcr-index>7</pcr-index> <pcr-index>7</pcr-index>
</tpm20-pcr-selection> </tpm20-pcr-selection>
</tpm20-challenge-response-attestation> </tpm20-challenge-response-attestation>
</rpc> </rpc>
A successful response could be formatted as follows: A successful response could be formatted as follows:
<rpc-reply message-id="101" <rpc-reply message-id="101"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<tpm20-attestation-response <tpm20-attestation-response
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tpm-remote-attestation"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tpm-remote-attestation">
<certificate-name <certificate-name
xmlns:ks=urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-keystore> xmlns:ks=urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-keystore>
ks:(instance of Certificate name in the Keystore) ks:(instance of Certificate name in the Keystore)
skipping to change at page 47, line 24 skipping to change at page 48, line 24
} }
<CODE ENDS> <CODE ENDS>
Note that not all cryptographic functions are required for use by Note that not all cryptographic functions are required for use by
"ietf-tpm-remote-attestation.yang". However the full definition of "ietf-tpm-remote-attestation.yang". However the full definition of
Table 3 of [TCG-Algos] will allow use by additional YANG Table 3 of [TCG-Algos] will allow use by additional YANG
specifications. specifications.
3. IANA Considerations 3. IANA Considerations
This document will include requests to IANA: This document registers the following namespace URIs in the "ns"
class of the IETF XML Registry [IANA.xml-registry] as per [RFC3688]:
To be defined yet. But keeping up with changes to "ietf-tcg- URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tpm-remote-attestation
algs.yang" will be necessary.
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcg-algs
Registrant Contact: The IESG.
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document registers the following YANG modules in the "YANG
Module Names" registry [IANA.yang-parameters] as per Section 14 of
[RFC6020]:
Name: ietf-tpm-remote-attestation
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tpm-remote-
attestation
Prefix: tpm
Reference: draft-ietf-rats-yang-tpm-charra (RFC form)
Name: ietf-tcg-algs
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-tcg-algs
Prefix: taa
Reference: draft-ietf-rats-yang-tpm-charra (RFC form)
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such
as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer
is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer
is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
[RFC8446]. [RFC8446].
skipping to change at page 48, line 30 skipping to change at page 50, line 14
the certificate is for an active AIK, i. e. the certificate the certificate is for an active AIK, i. e. the certificate
provided is able to support Attestation on the targeted TPM 1.2. provided is able to support Attestation on the targeted TPM 1.2.
RPC 'tpm20-challenge-response-attestation': It must be verified that RPC 'tpm20-challenge-response-attestation': It must be verified that
the certificate is for an active AK, i. e. the certificate the certificate is for an active AK, i. e. the certificate
provided is able to support Attestation on the targeted TPM 2.0. provided is able to support Attestation on the targeted TPM 2.0.
RPC 'log-retrieval': Pulling lots of logs can chew up system RPC 'log-retrieval': Pulling lots of logs can chew up system
resources. resources.
5. Acknowledgements 5. Change Log
Not yet. Changes from version 08 to version 09:
6. Change Log * Minor formatting tweaks for shepherd. IANA registered.
Changes from version 05 to version 06: Changes from version 05 to version 06:
* More YANG Dr comments covered * More YANG Dr comments covered
Changes from version 04 to version 05: Changes from version 04 to version 05:
* YANG Dr comments covered * YANG Dr comments covered
Changes from version 03 to version 04: Changes from version 03 to version 04:
skipping to change at page 49, line 45 skipping to change at page 51, line 31
* Relabeled location with compute-node or tpm-name where appropriate * Relabeled location with compute-node or tpm-name where appropriate
* Added a valid entity-mib physical-index to compute-node and tpm- * Added a valid entity-mib physical-index to compute-node and tpm-
name to map it back to hardware inventory name to map it back to hardware inventory
* Relabeled name to tpm_name * Relabeled name to tpm_name
* Removed event-string in last-entry * Removed event-string in last-entry
7. References 6. References
7.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-netconf-keystore] [I-D.ietf-netconf-keystore]
Watsen, K., "A YANG Data Model for a Keystore", Work in Watsen, K., "A YANG Data Model for a Keystore", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-netconf-keystore-22, Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-netconf-keystore-22,
18 May 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf- 18 May 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-
netconf-keystore-22.txt>. netconf-keystore-22.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-rats-architecture] [I-D.ietf-rats-architecture]
Birkholz, H., Thaler, D., Richardson, M., Smith, N., and Birkholz, H., Thaler, D., Richardson, M., Smith, N., and
W. Pan, "Remote Attestation Procedures Architecture", Work W. Pan, "Remote Attestation Procedures Architecture", Work
skipping to change at page 50, line 26 skipping to change at page 52, line 8
ietf-rats-architecture-12.txt>. ietf-rats-architecture-12.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-rats-tpm-based-network-device-attest] [I-D.ietf-rats-tpm-based-network-device-attest]
Fedorkow, G., Voit, E., and J. Fitzgerald-McKay, "TPM- Fedorkow, G., Voit, E., and J. Fitzgerald-McKay, "TPM-
based Network Device Remote Integrity Verification", Work based Network Device Remote Integrity Verification", Work
in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-tpm-based- in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-tpm-based-
network-device-attest-08, 26 July 2021, network-device-attest-08, 26 July 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rats-tpm- <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rats-tpm-
based-network-device-attest-08.txt>. based-network-device-attest-08.txt>.
[IANA.xml-registry]
IANA, "IETF XML Registry",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry>.
[IANA.yang-parameters]
IANA, "YANG Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", [RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013, RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8348] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Dong, J., and D. Romascanu, "A [RFC8348] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., Dong, J., and D. Romascanu, "A
YANG Data Model for Hardware Management", RFC 8348, YANG Data Model for Hardware Management", RFC 8348,
skipping to change at page 51, line 14 skipping to change at page 53, line 14
[TPM2.0] TCG, ., "TPM 2.0 Library Specification", 15 March 2013, [TPM2.0] TCG, ., "TPM 2.0 Library Specification", 15 March 2013,
<https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/resource/tpm-library- <https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/resource/tpm-library-
specification/>. specification/>.
[TPM2.0-Key] [TPM2.0-Key]
TCG, ., "TPM 2.0 Keys for Device Identity and Attestation, TCG, ., "TPM 2.0 Keys for Device Identity and Attestation,
Rev10", 14 April 2021, <https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/ Rev10", 14 April 2021, <https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/
wp-content/uploads/TCG_IWG_DevID_v1r2_02dec2020.pdf>. wp-content/uploads/TCG_IWG_DevID_v1r2_02dec2020.pdf>.
7.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-rats-reference-interaction-models] [I-D.ietf-rats-reference-interaction-models]
Birkholz, H., Eckel, M., Pan, W., and E. Voit, "Reference Birkholz, H., Eckel, M., Pan, W., and E. Voit, "Reference
Interaction Models for Remote Attestation Procedures", Interaction Models for Remote Attestation Procedures",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats- Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-
reference-interaction-models-04, 26 July 2021, reference-interaction-models-04, 26 July 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rats- <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rats-
reference-interaction-models-04.txt>. reference-interaction-models-04.txt>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
 End of changes. 18 change blocks. 
53 lines changed or deleted 100 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/