HTTP Signatures
draft-cavage-http-signatures-01

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2014-02-01
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                          M. Cavage
Internet-Draft                                                    Joyent
Intended status: Standards Track                               M. Sporny
Expires: August 5, 2014                                   Digital Bazaar
                                                        February 1, 2014

                            HTTP Signatures
                    draft-cavage-http-signatures-01

Abstract

   When communicating over the Internet using the HTTP protocol, it is
   often desirable to be able to securely verify the sender of a message
   as well as ensure that the message was not tampered with during
   transit.  This document describes a way to add origin authentication
   and message integrity to HTTP messages.

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 August 5, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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.

Cavage & Sporny          Expires August 5, 2014                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               HTTP Signatures               February 2014

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Signature Authentication Scheme  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     2.1.  Authorization Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
       2.1.1.  Signature Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
       2.1.2.  Signature String Construction  . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.  Appendix A: Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  Appendix B: Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  Appendix C: Test Values  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     5.1.  Default Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.2.  Basic Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.3.  All Headers Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Cavage & Sporny          Expires August 5, 2014                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft               HTTP Signatures               February 2014

1.  Introduction

   This protocol is intended to provide a standard way for clients to
   sign HTTP requests.  RFC 2617 [RFC2617] (HTTP Authentication) defines
   Basic and Digest authentication mechanisms, and RFC 5246 [RFC5246]
   (TLS 1.2) defines client-auth, both of which are widely employed on
   the Internet today.  However, it is common place that the burdens of
   PKI prevent web service operators from deploying that methodoloy, and
   so many fall back to Basic authentication, which has poor security
   characteristics.

   Additionally, OAuth provides a fully-specified alternative for
   authorization of web service requests, but is not (always) ideal for
   machine to machine communication, as the key acquisition steps
   (generally) imply a fixed infrastructure that may not make sense to a
   service provider (e.g., symmetric keys).

   Several web service providers have invented their own schemes for
   signing HTTP requests, but to date, none have been placed in the
   public domain as a standard.  This document serves that purpose.
   There are no techniques in this proposal that are novel beyond
   previous art, however, this aims to be a simple mechanism for signing
   these requests.

2.  Signature Authentication Scheme

   The "signature" authentication scheme is based on the model that the
   client must authenticate itself with a digital signature produced by
   either a private asymmetric key (e.g., RSA) or a shared symmetric key
   (e.g., HMAC).  The scheme is parameterized enough such that it is not
   bound to any particular key type or signing algorithm.  However, it
   does explicitly assume that clients can send an HTTP `Date` header.

2.1.  Authorization Header
Show full document text