Algorithms for Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1)
draft-hoffman-ikev1-algorithms-03
The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 4109.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Paul E. Hoffman | ||
| Last updated | 2015-10-14 (Latest revision 2004-12-20) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | WG state | (None) | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 4109 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Russ Housley | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-hoffman-ikev1-algorithms-03
Network Working Group P. Hoffman
Internet-Draft VPN Consortium
Expires: June 17, 2005 December 17, 2004
Algorithms for Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1)
draft-hoffman-ikev1-algorithms-03.txt
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions
of section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each
author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of
which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of
which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
RFC 3668.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 17, 2005.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
Abstract
The required and suggested algorithms in the original IKEv1
specification do not reflect the current reality of the IPsec market
requirements. The original specification allows weak security and
suggests algorithms that are thinly implemented. This document
updates RFC 2409, the original specification, and is intended for all
IKEv1 implementations deployed today.
Hoffman Expires June 17, 2005 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Algorithms for IKEv1 December 2004
1. Introduction
The original IKEv1 definition, [RFC2409], has a set of MUST-level and
SHOULD-level requirements that do not match the needs of IPsec users.
This document updates RFC 2409 by changing the algorithm requirements
defined there.
The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when they appear in this
document, are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Old algorithm requirements
RFC 2409 has the following MUST-level and SHOULD-level requirements:
o DES for encryption MUST be supported
o MD5 and SHA-1 for hashing and HMAC functions MUST be supported
o Pre-shared secrets for authentication MUST be supported
o Diffie-Hellman MODP group 1 (discrete log 768 bits) MUST be
supported
o TripleDES for encryption SHOULD be supported
o Tiger for hashing SHOULD be supported
o DSA and RSA for authentication with signatures SHOULD be supported
o RSA for authentication with encryption SHOULD be supported
o Diffie-Hellman MODP group 2 (discrete log 1024 bits) SHOULD be
supported
RFC 2409 gives two conflicting requirement levels for Diffie-Hellman
MODP groups with elliptic curves. Section 4 of that specification
says "IKE implementations ... MAY support ECP and EC2N groups", but
Sections 6.3 and 6.4 say that MODP groups 3 and 4 for EC2N groups
SHOULD be supported.
3. New algorithm requirements
The new requirements for IKEv1 are listed here. Note that some of
the requirements are the same as in RFC 2409, while others are
changed.
o TripleDES for encryption MUST be supported
o AES-128 in CBC mode [RFC3602] for encryption SHOULD be supported
o SHA-1 for hashing and HMAC functions MUST be supported
o Pre-shared secrets for authentication MUST be supported
o AES-128 in XCBC mode for PRF functions ([RFC3566] and [RFC3664])
SHOULD be supported
o Diffie-Hellman MODP group 2 (discrete log 1024 bits) MUST be
supported
Hoffman Expires June 17, 2005 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Algorithms for IKEv1 December 2004
o Diffie-Hellman MODP group 14 (discrete log 2048 bits) [RFC3526]
SHOULD be supported
o RSA for authentication with signatures SHOULD be supported
If additional updates are make to IKEv1 in the future, then it is
very likely that AES-128 in CBC mode for encryption will become
mandatory to implement.
The other algorithms that were listed at MUST-level and SHOULD-level
in RFC 2409 are now MAY-level. This includes DES for encryption, MD5
and Tiger for hashing, Diffie-Hellman MODP group 1, Diffie-Hellman
MODP groups with elliptic curves, DSA for authentication with
signatures, and RSA for authentication with encryption.
DES for encryption, MD5 for hashing, Diffie-Hellman MODP group 1 are
dropped to MAY due to cryptographic weakness.
Tiger for hashing, Diffie-Hellman MODP groups with elliptic curves,
DSA for authentication with signatures, and RSA for authentication
with encryption are dropped due to lack of any significant deployment
and interoperability.
4. Summary
Algorithm RFC 2409 This document
------------------------------------------------------------------
DES for encryption MUST MAY (crypto weakness)
TripleDES for encryption SHOULD MUST
AES-128 for encryption N/A SHOULD
MD5 for hashing and HMAC MUST MAY (crypto weakness)
SHA1 for hashing and HMAC MUST MUST
Tiger for hashing SHOULD MAY (lack of deployment)
AES-XCBC-MAC-96 for PRF N/A SHOULD
Pre-shared secrets MUST MUST
RSA with signatures SHOULD SHOULD
DSA with signatures SHOULD MAY (lack of deployment)
RSA with encryption SHOULD MAY (lack of deployment)
D-H Group 1 (768) MUST MAY (crypto weakness)
D-H Group 2 (1024) SHOULD MUST
D-H Group 14 (2048) N/A SHOULD
D-H elliptic curves SHOULD MAY (lack of deployment)
5. Security Considerations
This document is all about security. All the algorithms that are
either MUST-level or SHOULD-level in the "new algoritm requirements"
section of this document are believed to be robust and secure at the
time of this writing.
Hoffman Expires June 17, 2005 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Algorithms for IKEv1 December 2004
6 Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2409] Harkins, D. and D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange
(IKE)", RFC 2409, November 1998.
[RFC3526] Kivinen, T. and M. Kojo, "More Modular Exponential (MODP)
Diffie-Hellman groups for Internet Key Exchange (IKE)",
RFC 3526, May 2003.
[RFC3566] Frankel, S. and H. Herbert, "The AES-XCBC-MAC-96 Algorithm
and Its Use With IPsec", RFC 3566, September 2003.
[RFC3602] Frankel, S., Glenn, R. and S. Kelly, "The AES-CBC Cipher
Algorithm and Its Use with IPsec", RFC 3602, September
2003.
[RFC3664] Hoffman, P., "The AES-XCBC-PRF-128 Algorithm for the
Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE)", RFC 3664, January
2004.
Author's Address
Paul Hoffman
VPN Consortium
127 Segre Place
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
US
EMail: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org
Hoffman Expires June 17, 2005 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Algorithms for IKEv1 December 2004
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Hoffman Expires June 17, 2005 [Page 5]