Skip to main content

Enhancing Security in EAP-AKA' with Hybrid Post-Quantum Cryptography
draft-ar-emu-pqc-eapaka-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Aritra Banerjee , Tirumaleswar Reddy.K
Last updated 2024-07-23
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-ar-emu-pqc-eapaka-02
EMU                                                          A. Banerjee
Internet-Draft                                                  T. Reddy
Intended status: Standards Track                                   Nokia
Expires: 24 January 2025                                    23 July 2024

  Enhancing Security in EAP-AKA' with Hybrid Post-Quantum Cryptography
                       draft-ar-emu-pqc-eapaka-02

Abstract

   Forward Secrecy for the Extensible Authentication Protocol Method for
   Authentication and Key Agreement (EAP-AKA' FS) is specified in
   [I-D.ietf-emu-aka-pfs], providing updates to [RFC9048] with an
   optional extension that offers ephemeral key exchange using the
   traditional Ephemeral Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDHE) key
   agreement algorithm for achieving perfect forward secrecy (PFS).
   However, it is susceptible to future threats from Cryptographically
   Relevant Quantum Computers, which could potentially compromise a
   traditional ephemeral public key.  If the adversary has also obtained
   knowledge of the long-term key and ephemeral public key, it could
   compromise session keys generated as part of the authentication run
   in EAP-AKA'.

   This draft aims to enhance the security of EAP-AKA' FS making it
   quantum-safe.

About This Document

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   Status information for this document may be found at
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ar-emu-pqc-eapaka/.

   Discussion of this document takes place on the emu Working Group
   mailing list (mailto:emu@ietf.org), which is archived at
   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emu/.  Subscribe at
   https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu/.

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/.

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

   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 24 January 2025.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Background on EAP-AKA' with perfect forward secrecy . . . . .   4
   5.  Hybrid Enhancements by Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  Protocol Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     6.1.  Protocol Call Flow  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     6.2.  Key Steps in protocol construction  . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Extensions to EAP-AKA' FS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.1.  AT_PUB_HYBRID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

1.  Introduction

   Forward Secrecy for the Extensible Authentication Protocol Method for
   Authentication and Key Agreement (EAP-AKA' FS) defined in
   [I-D.ietf-emu-aka-pfs] updates the improved Extensible Authentication
   Protocol Method for 3GPP Mobile Network Authentication and Key
   Agreement (EAP-AKA') specified in [RFC9048], with an optional
   extension providing ephemeral key exchange.  This prevents an
   attacker who has gained access to the long term key from obtaining
   session keys established in the past, assuming these have been
   properly deleted.  EAP-AKA' FS mitigates passive attacks (e.g., large
   scale pervasive monitoring) against future sessions.

   Nevertheless, EAP-AKA' FS uses traditional algorithms public-key
   algorithms (e.g., ECDH) which will be broken by a Cryptographically
   Relevant Quantum Computer (CRQC) using Shor's algorithm.  The
   presence of a CRQC would render state-of-the-art, traditional public-
   key algorithms deployed today obsolete and insecure, since the
   assumptions about the intractability of the mathematical problems for
   these algorithms that offer confident levels of security today no
   longer apply in the presence of a CRQC.  A CRQC could recover the
   SHARED_SECRET from the ECDHE public keys (Section 6.3 of
   [I-D.ietf-emu-aka-pfs]).  If the adversary has also obtained
   knowledge of the long-term key, it could then compute CK', IK', and
   the SHARED_SECRET, and any derived output keys.  This means that the
   CRQC would disable the forward security capability provided by
   [I-D.ietf-emu-aka-pfs].

   The migration to PQC is unique in the history of modern digital
   cryptography in that neither the traditional algorithms nor the post-
   quantum algorithms are fully trusted to protect data for the required
   data lifetimes.  The post-quantum algorithms face uncertainty about
   the underlying mathematics, compliance issues, unknown
   vulnerabilities, hardware and software implementations that have not
   had sufficient maturing time to rule out classical cryptanalytic
   attacks and implementation bugs.  During the transition from
   traditional to post-quantum algorithms, there is a desire or a
   requirement for protocols that use both algorithm types.

   This specification defines Hybrid public-key encryption (HPKE)
   [RFC9180] for use with EAP-AKA' FS.  HPKE offers a variant of public-
   key encryption of arbitrary-sized plaintexts for a recipient public
   key.  HPKE works for any combination of an asymmetric key
   encapsulation mechanism (KEM), key derivation function (KDF), and
   authenticated encryption with additional data (AEAD) function.  HPKE
   can be extended to support hybrid post-quantum Key Encapsulation
   Mechanisms (KEMs) as defined in [I-D.connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem].

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

2.  Conventions and Definitions

   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.

3.  Terminology

   This document makes use of the terms defined in
   [I-D.ietf-pquip-pqt-hybrid-terminology].  For the purposes of this
   document, it is helpful to be able to divide cryptographic algorithms
   into two classes:

   "Traditional Algorithm": An asymmetric cryptographic algorithm based
   on integer factorisation, finite field discrete logarithms or
   elliptic curve discrete logarithms.  In the context of JOSE, examples
   of traditional key exchange algorithms include Elliptic Curve Diffie-
   Hellman Ephemeral Static [RFC6090] [RFC8037].  In the context of
   COSE, examples of traditional key exchange algorithms include
   Ephemeral-Static (ES) DH and Static-Static (SS) DH [RFC9052].

   "Post-Quantum Algorithm": An asymmetric cryptographic algorithm that
   is believed to be secure against attacks using quantum computers as
   well as classical computers.  Examples of PQC key exchange algorithms
   include Kyber.

   "Hybrid" key exchange, in this context, means the use of two key
   exchange algorithms based on different cryptographic assumptions,
   e.g., one traditional algorithm and one Post-Quantum algorithm, with
   the purpose of the final shared secret key being secure as long as at
   least one of the component key exchange algorithms remains unbroken.
   It is referred to as PQ/T Hybrid Scheme in
   [I-D.ietf-pquip-pqt-hybrid-terminology].

   PQ/T Hybrid Key Encapsulation Mechanism: A Key Encapsulation
   mechanism (KEM) made up of two or more component KEM algorithms where
   at least one is a post-quantum algorithm and at least one is a
   traditional algorithm.

4.  Background on EAP-AKA' with perfect forward secrecy

   In EAP-AKA', The authentication vector (AV) contains a random part
   RAND, an authenticator part AUTN used for authenticating the network
   to the USIM, an expected result part XRES, a 128-bit session key for
   integrity check IK, and a 128-bit session key for encryption CK.

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

   As described in the draft [I-D.draft-ietf-emu-aka-pfs-11], the server
   has the EAP identity of the peer.  The server asks the AD to run AKA
   algorithm to generate RAND, AUTN, XRES, CK and IK.  Further it also
   derives CK’ and IK’ keys which are tied to a particular network name.
   The server now generates the ephemeral key pair and sends the public
   key of that key pair and the first EAP method message to the peer.
   In this EAP message, AT_PUB_ECDHE (carries public key) and the
   AT_KDF_FS(carries other FS related parameters).  Both of these might
   be ignored of USIM doesn’t support the Forward Secrecy extension.
   The peer checks if it wants to have a Forward extension in EAP AKA'.
   If yes, then it will eventually respond with AT_PUB_ECDHE and MAC.
   If not, it will ignore AT_PUB_ECDHE.  If the peer wants to
   participate in FS extension, it will then generate its ECDH key pair,
   calculate a shared key based on its private key and server public
   key.  The server will receive the RES from peer and AT_PUB_ECDHE.
   The shared key will be generated both in the peer and the server with
   key pairs exchanged, and later master key is also generated.

   MK_ECDHE = PRF'(IK'| CK'|SHARED_SECRET,"EAP-AKA' FS"|Identity)

5.  Hybrid Enhancements by Design

   We suggest the following changes and enhancements:

   *  A new attribute, AT_PUB_HYBRID, is defined to carry the public
      key, which is the concatenation of traditional and PQC KEM public
      keys from the EAP server.  The AT_PUB_HYBRID attribute will carry
      the encapsulated key, which is formed by concatenating the
      encapsulated key (enc) from the traditional KEM algorithm and the
      ciphertext (ct) from the PQC KEM Encapsulation function from the
      EAP peer.

   *  The AT_KDF_FS attribute is updated to indicate the HPKE KEM and
      HKDF for generating the Hybrid Master Key MK_HYBRID.

   *  Multiple AT_KDF_FS attributes is included in the EAP-Request to
      handle the EAP peer not supporting HPKE Hybrid KEM.

   *  The Hybrid key derivation function will be included first in the
      EAP-Request to indicate a higher priority than the traditional key
      derivation function.

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

6.  Protocol Construction

   This section defines the construction for hybrid key exchange in EAP-
   AKA' FS.  Hybrid key exchange refers to using multiple key exchange
   algorithms simultaneously and combining the result with the goal of
   providing security even if all but one of the component algorithms is
   broken.  It is motivated by transition to post-quantum cryptography.

6.1.  Protocol Call Flow

    USIM           Peer                        Server              AD
     |              |                            |                |
     |              |           EAP-Req/Identity |                |
     |              |<---------------------------+                |
     |              |                            |                |
     |              | EAP-Resp/Identity          |                |
     |              | (Privacy-Friendly)         |                |
     |              +--------------------------->|                |
     |      +-------+----------------------------+----------------+--+
     |      | Server now has an identity for the peer. The server    |
     |      | then asks the help of AD to run AKA algorithms,        |
     |      | generating RAND, AUTN, XRES, CK, IK. Typically, the    |
     |      | AD performs the first part of key derivations so that  |
     |      | the authentication server gets the CK' and IK' keys    |
     |      | already tied to a particular network name.             |
     |      +-------+----------------------------+----------------+--+
     |              |                            |                |
     |              |                            | ID, key deriv. |
     |              |                            | function,      |
     |              |                            | network name   |
     |              |                            +--------------->|
     |              |                            |                |
     |              |                            |    RAND, AUTN, |
     |              |                            | XRES, CK', IK' |
     |              |                            |<---------------+
     |      +-------+----------------------------+----------------+--+
     |      | Server now has the needed authentication vector. It    |
     |      | generates a PQC KEM key pair, an ephemeral ECDHE key   |
     |      | pair, sends the hybrid (PQC + ECDHE) public key of that|
     |      | key pair and the first EAP method message to the peer  |
     |      | In the message the AT_PUB_HYBRID attribute             |
     |      | carries the concatenation of PQC KEM and ECDHE public  |
     |      | keys and the AT_KDF_FS attribute carries other         |
     |      | FS-related parameters. Both of these are               |
     |      | skippable attributes that can be ignored if the peer   |
     |      | does not support this extension.                       |
     |      +-------+----------------------------+----------------+--+
     |              |                            |                |

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

     |              |     EAP-Req/AKA'-Challenge |                |
     |              |  AT_RAND, AT_AUTN, AT_KDF, |                |
     |              |   AT_KDF_FS, AT_KDF_INPUT, |                |
     |              |       AT_PUB_HYBRID, AT_MAC|                |
     |              |<---------------------------+                |
   +--+--------------+----------------------------+---------+     |
   | The peer checks if it wants to do the FS extension. If |     |
   | yes, it will eventually respond with AT_PUB_HYBRID and |     |
   | AT_MAC. If not, it will ignore AT_PUB_HYBRID and       |     |
   | AT_KDF_FS and base all calculations on basic EAP-AKA'  |     |
   | attributes, continuing just as in EAP-AKA' per RFC     |     |
   | 9048 rules. In any case, the peer needs to query the   |     |
   | auth parameters from the USIM card.                    |     |
   +--+--------------+----------------------------+---------+     |
     |              |                            |                |
     |   RAND, AUTN |                            |                |
     |<-------------+                            |                |
     |              |                            |                |
     | CK, IK, RES  |                            |                |
     +------------->|                            |                |
   +--+--------------+----------------------------+---------+     |
   | The peer now has everything to respond. If it wants to |     |
   | participate in the FS extension, it will then generate |     |
   | its ECDHE key pair, calculate a hybrid shared secret   |     |
   | key based on the server's PQC KEM public key, its ECDHE|     |
   | key pair and the server's ECDHE public key. Finally,   |     |
   | it proceeds to derive all EAP-AKA' key values and      |     |
   | constructs a full response.                            |     |
   +--+--------------+----------------------------+---------+     |
     |              |                            |                |
     |              | EAP-Resp/AKA'-Challenge    |                |
     |              | AT_RES, AT_PUB_HYBRID,     |                |
     |              | AT_MAC                     |                |
     |              +--------------------------->|                |
     |      +-------+----------------------------+----------------+--+
     |      | The server now has all the necessary values. It        |
     |      | generates the Hybrid shared secret and checks the RES  |
     |      | and MAC values received in AT_RES and AT_MAC,          |
     |      | respectively. Success requires both to be found        |
     |      | correct. Note that when this document is used,         |
     |      | the keys generated from EAP-AKA' are based on CK, IK,  |
     |      | and the ECDHE and PQC KEM values. Even if there was an |
     |      | attacker who held the long-term key, only an active    |
     |      | attacker could have determined the generated session   |
     |      | keys; additionally an attacker with a cryptographically|
     |      | relevant quantum computer cannot get access to the     |
     |      | server KEM private key and decrypt the data.           |
     |      +-------+----------------------------+----------------+--+

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

     |              |                            |                |
     |              |                EAP-Success |                |
     |              |<---------------------------+                |
     |              |                            |                |

6.2.  Key Steps in protocol construction

   We outline the following key steps in the protocol:

   *  Server generates the PQC KEM Public key(pk_M), private key (sk_M)
      pair and the ECDH public key (pk_X), private key (sk_X) pair.  The
      server will generate and send the EAP AKA' Authentication Vector
      (AV).  As defined in section 5.2 of [I-D.connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem]
      the server PQC KEM and ECDH key pairs are derived as:

      def GenerateKeyPair():
        (pk_M, sk_M) = ML-KEM-768.KeyGen()
        sk_X = random(32)
        pk_X = X25519(sk_X, X25519_BASE)
        return concat(sk_M, sk_X, pk_X), concat(pk_M, pk_X)

   *  The server will store the expected response XRES, the ECDH private
      key sk_X and the PQC KEM private key sk_M.  The server will
      forward the EAP AKA' AV to peer along with pk_X and pk_M.

   *  The USIM will validate the AUTH received, also verifies the MAC.
      After the verification is successful and if the peer also supports
      the Forward secrecy, peer will invoke Encapsulate using
      concat(pk_M,pk_X) as defined in section 5.4 of
      [I-D.connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem]:

      def Encapsulate(pk):
        pk_M = pk[0:1184]
        pk_X = pk[1184:1216]
        ek_X = random(32)
        ct_X = X25519(ek_X, X25519_BASE)
        ss_X = X25519(ek_X, pk_X)
        (ss_M, ct_M) = ML-KEM-768.Encaps(pk_M)
        ss = Combiner(ss_M, ss_X, ct_X, pk_X)
        ct = concat(ct_M, ct_X)
        return (ss, ct)

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

   "ct" is the concatenation of the ciphertext from PQC KEM and
   encapsulated key from ECDH whereas "ss" is hybrid shared secret key.
   Hybrid shared key ss is generated by the peer using the Encapsulate()
   ([I-D.connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem]).  The Combiner() is a "hash and
   concatenation" based approach using SHA3-256 (See section 5.3 of
   [I-D.connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem]) to generate a “hybrid” shared secret
   (ss).

   *  The peer will send the Authentication response RES and ct to the
      server.

   *  The server will verify the RES with XRES.  The server will use the
      ct, PQC KEM private key sk_M and ECDH private key sk_X to generate
      shared secret:

      def Decapsulate(ct, sk):
        ct_M = ct[0:1088]
        ct_X = ct[1088:1120]
        sk_M = sk[0:2400]
        sk_X = sk[2400:2432]
        pk_X = sk[2432:2464]
        ss_M = ML-KEM-768.Decapsulate(ct_M, sk_M)
        ss_X = X25519(sk_X, ct_X)
        return Combiner(ss_M, ss_X, ct_X, pk_X)

   The generated ss from Decapsulate is the hybrid shared secret key
   derived from PQC KEM and traditional ECDH.  The peer and the server
   first generate the MK_HYBRID and subsequently generate MSK, EMSK as
   shown below:

   MK = PRF'(IK'|CK',"EAP-AKA'"|Identity)
   HYBRID_SHARED_SECRET, ct = Encapsulate(pKR)
   MK_HYBRID = PRF'(IK'|CK'| HYBRID_SHARED_SECRET,"EAP-AKA' FS"| Identity)
   K_encr = MK[0..127]
   K_aut = MK[128..383]
   K_re = MK_HYBRID [0..255]
   MSK = MK_HYBRID [256..767]
   EMSK = MK_HYBRID [768..1279]

   where, pkR is concatenation of PQC KEM and traditional public keys of
   the receiver, ct is concatenation of the ciphertext from the PQC KEM
   and encapsulated key from ECDH; the Encapsulate() function is
   perfomed by the peer only.

7.  Extensions to EAP-AKA' FS

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

7.1.  AT_PUB_HYBRID

   The format of the AT_PUB_HYBRID attribute is shown below.

        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       | AT_PUB_HYBRID | Length        | Value                         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The fields are as follows:

   AT_PUB_HYBID:

   This is set to TBA1 BY IANA.

   Length:

   The length of the attribute, set as other attributes in EAP-AKA
   [RFC4187].  The length is expressed in multiples of 4 bytes.  The
   length includes the attribute type field, the Length field itself,
   and the Value field (along with any padding).

   Value:

  *  EAP-Request: It contains the public key, which is the concatenation of
     traditional and PQC KEM public keys from the EAP server.
  *  EAP-Response: It contains the encapsulated key, which is formed by
     concatenating the ciphertext (ct) from the PQC KEM Encapsulation function
     and the encapsulated key (enc) from the traditional KEM algorithm and from the
     EAP peer.

   Because the length of the attribute must be a multiple of 4 bytes,the
   sender pads the Value field with zero bytes when necessary.  To
   retain the security of the keys, the sender SHALL generate a fresh
   value for each run of the protocol.

8.  Security Considerations

   ML-KEM is IND-CCA2 secure based on multiple analyses.  The ML-KEM
   variant and its underlying components should be selected consistently
   with the desired security level.  For further clarity on the sizes
   and security levels of ML-KEM variants, please refer to the tables in
   Sections 12 and 13 of [I-D.ietf-pquip-pqc-engineers].

   The security of the ML-KEM algorithm depends on a high-quality
   pseudo-random number generator.  For further discussion on random
   number generation, see [RFC4086].

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

   In general, good cryptographic practice dictates that a given ML-KEM
   key pair should be used in only one EAP session.  This practice
   mitigates the risk that compromising one EAP session will not
   compromise the security of another EAP session and is essential for
   maintaining forward security.

   For security properties of traditional ECDHE for EAP-AKA FS, see
   section 7 of [I-D.ietf-emu-aka-pfs].  The overall Hybrid scheme needs
   to be IND-CCA2 robust; i.e., atleast one of the schemes should be
   IND-CCA2 secure.

9.  IANA Considerations

   One new value (TBA1) in the skippable range need to be assigned by
   IANA for AT_PUB_HYBRID (Section 7.1) in the "Attribute Types"
   registry under the "EAP-AKA and EAP-SIM Parameters" group.

   IANA is requested to update the registry "EAP-AKA' AT_KDF_FS Key
   Derivation Function Values" with the Hybrid key derivation function
   entry:

   +=========+===============================+=========================+
   | Value   | Description                   | Reference               |
   +=========+===============================+=========================+
   | TBA2    | X25519Kyber768Draft00         | [TBD BY IANA: THIS RFC] |
   +=========+===============================+=========================+

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-emu-aka-pfs]
              Arkko, J., Norrman, K., and J. P. Mattsson, "Forward
              Secrecy for the Extensible Authentication Protocol Method
              for Authentication and Key Agreement (EAP-AKA' FS)", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-emu-aka-pfs-12, 19
              February 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-ietf-emu-aka-pfs-12>.

   [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/rfc/rfc2119>.

   [RFC4187]  Arkko, J. and H. Haverinen, "Extensible Authentication
              Protocol Method for 3rd Generation Authentication and Key
              Agreement (EAP-AKA)", RFC 4187, DOI 10.17487/RFC4187,
              January 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4187>.

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025               [Page 11]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

   [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/rfc/rfc8174>.

   [RFC9048]  Arkko, J., Lehtovirta, V., Torvinen, V., and P. Eronen,
              "Improved Extensible Authentication Protocol Method for
              3GPP Mobile Network Authentication and Key Agreement (EAP-
              AKA')", RFC 9048, DOI 10.17487/RFC9048, October 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9048>.

   [RFC9180]  Barnes, R., Bhargavan, K., Lipp, B., and C. Wood, "Hybrid
              Public Key Encryption", RFC 9180, DOI 10.17487/RFC9180,
              February 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9180>.

10.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem]
              Connolly, D., Schwabe, P., and B. Westerbaan, "X-Wing:
              general-purpose hybrid post-quantum KEM", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem-
              02, 26 March 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-connolly-cfrg-xwing-kem-02>.

   [I-D.draft-ietf-emu-aka-pfs-11]
              Arkko, J., Norrman, K., and J. P. Mattsson, "Forward
              Secrecy for the Extensible Authentication Protocol Method
              for Authentication and Key Agreement (EAP-AKA' FS)", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-emu-aka-pfs-11, 10
              July 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
              ietf-emu-aka-pfs-11>.

   [I-D.ietf-pquip-pqc-engineers]
              Banerjee, A., Reddy.K, T., Schoinianakis, D., and T.
              Hollebeek, "Post-Quantum Cryptography for Engineers", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-pquip-pqc-
              engineers-04, 21 May 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pquip-
              pqc-engineers-04>.

   [I-D.ietf-pquip-pqt-hybrid-terminology]
              D, F. and M. P, "Terminology for Post-Quantum Traditional
              Hybrid Schemes", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-pquip-pqt-hybrid-terminology-03, 9 May 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pquip-
              pqt-hybrid-terminology-03>.

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025               [Page 12]
Internet-Draft         PQC Hybrid in EAP-AKA prime             July 2024

   [RFC4086]  Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker,
              "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4086, June 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4086>.

   [RFC6090]  McGrew, D., Igoe, K., and M. Salter, "Fundamental Elliptic
              Curve Cryptography Algorithms", RFC 6090,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6090, February 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6090>.

   [RFC8037]  Liusvaara, I., "CFRG Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH)
              and Signatures in JSON Object Signing and Encryption
              (JOSE)", RFC 8037, DOI 10.17487/RFC8037, January 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8037>.

   [RFC9052]  Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE):
              Structures and Process", STD 96, RFC 9052,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9052, August 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9052>.

Appendix A.  Acknowledgements

   This draft leverages text from [I-D.draft-ietf-emu-aka-pfs-11]

Authors' Addresses

   Aritra Banerjee
   Nokia
   Munich
   Germany
   Email: aritra.banerjee@nokia.com

   Tirumaleswar Reddy
   Nokia
   Bangalore
   Karnataka
   India
   Email: kondtir@gmail.com

Banerjee & Reddy         Expires 24 January 2025               [Page 13]