CBOR Encoded X.509 Certificates (C509 Certificates)
draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert-04
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | John Preuß Mattsson , Göran Selander , Shahid Raza , Joel Höglund , Martin Furuhed | ||
| Last updated | 2022-07-10 | ||
| Replaces | draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert-04
Network Working Group J. Preuß Mattsson
Internet-Draft G. Selander
Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson AB
Expires: 11 January 2023 S. Raza
J. Höglund
RISE AB
M. Furuhed
Nexus Group
10 July 2022
CBOR Encoded X.509 Certificates (C509 Certificates)
draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert-04
Abstract
This document specifies a CBOR encoding of X.509 certificates. The
resulting certificates are called C509 Certificates. The CBOR
encoding supports a large subset of RFC 5280 and all certificates
compatible with the RFC 7925, IEEE 802.1AR (DevID), CNSA, RPKI, GSMA
eUICC, and CA/Browser Forum Baseline Requirements profiles. When
used to re-encode DER encoded X.509 certificates, the CBOR encoding
can in many cases reduce the size of RFC 7925 profiled certificates
with over 50%. The CBOR encoded structure can alternatively be
signed directly ("natively signed"), which does not require re-
encoding for the signature to be verified. The document also
specifies C509 COSE headers, a C509 TLS certificate type, and a C509
file format.
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 11 January 2023.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 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. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. C509 Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Message Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Encoding of subjectPublicKey and issuerSignatureValue . . 9
3.3. Encoding of Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. C509 Certificate Signing Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. C509 Certificate Revocation List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. C509 Online Certificate Status Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. C509 Processing and Certificate Issuance . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Legacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. Expected Certificate Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1. C509 Certificate Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.2. C509 Attributes Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11.3. C509 Extensions Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
11.4. C509 Certificate Policies Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 27
11.5. C509 Policies Qualifiers Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 29
11.6. C509 Information Access Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
11.7. C509 Extended Key Usages Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 32
11.8. C509 General Names Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
11.9. C509 Signature Algorithms Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 35
11.10. C509 Public Key Algorithms Registry . . . . . . . . . . 38
11.11. COSE Header Parameters Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
11.12. TLS Certificate Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
11.13. CBOR Tags Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Appendix A. Example C509 Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A.1. Example RFC 7925 profiled X.509 Certificate . . . . . . . 47
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
A.2. Example IEEE 802.1AR profiled X.509 Certificate . . . . . 50
A.3. Example CAB Baseline ECDSA HTTPS X.509 Certificate . . . 50
A.4. Example CAB Baseline RSA HTTPS X.509 Certificate . . . . 53
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
1. Introduction
One of the challenges with deploying a Public Key Infrastructure
(PKI) for the Internet of Things (IoT) is the size and parsing of
X.509 public key certificates [RFC5280], since those are not
optimized for constrained environments [RFC7228]. Large certificate
chains are also problematic in non-constrained protocols such as EAP-
TLS [RFC9190] [RFC9191] where authenticators typically drop an EAP
session after only 40 - 50 round-trips, QUIC [RFC9000] where the
latency increases significantly unless the server sends less than
three times as many bytes as received prior to validating the client
address, and RPKI [RFC6487] where a single certificate can be very
large. More compact certificate representations are therefore
desirable in many use cases. Due to the current PKI usage of DER
encoded X.509 certificates, keeping compatibility with DER encoded
X.509 is necessary at least for a transition period. However, the
use of a more compact encoding with the Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR) [RFC8949] reduces the certificate size
significantly which has known performance benefits in terms of
decreased communication overhead, power consumption, latency,
storage, etc.
CBOR is a data format designed for small code size and small message
size. CBOR builds on the JSON data model but extends it by e.g.
encoding binary data directly without base64 conversion. In addition
to the binary CBOR encoding, CBOR also has a diagnostic notation that
is readable and editable by humans. The Concise Data Definition
Language (CDDL) [RFC8610] provides a way to express structures for
protocol messages and APIs that use CBOR. RFC 8610 also extends the
diagnostic notation.
CBOR data items are encoded to or decoded from byte strings using a
type-length-value encoding scheme, where the three highest order bits
of the initial byte contain information about the major type. CBOR
supports several different types of data items, in addition to
integers (int, uint), simple values (e.g. null), byte strings (bstr),
and text strings (tstr), CBOR also supports arrays [] of data items,
maps {} of pairs of data items, and sequences of data items. For a
complete specification and examples, see [RFC8949], [RFC8610], and
[RFC8742]. We recommend implementors to get used to CBOR by using
the CBOR playground [CborMe].
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
CAB Baseline Requirements [CAB-TLS], RFC 7925 [RFC7925], IEEE 802.1AR
[IEEE-802.1AR], and CNSA [RFC8603] specify certificate profiles which
can be applied to certificate based authentication with, e.g., TLS
[RFC8446], QUIC [RFC9000], DTLS [RFC9147], COSE [RFC8152], EDHOC
[I-D.ietf-lake-edhoc], or Compact TLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-ctls]. RFC
7925 [RFC7925], RFC7925bis [I-D.ietf-uta-tls13-iot-profile], and IEEE
802.1AR [IEEE-802.1AR] specifically target Internet of Things
deployments. This document specifies a CBOR encoding based on
[X.509-IoT], which can support large parts of RFC 5280. The encoding
supports all RFC 7925, IEEE 802.1AR, CAB Baseline [CAB-TLS],
[CAB-Code], RPKI [RFC6487], eUICC [GSMA-eUICC] profiled X.509
certificates. The resulting certificates are called C509
Certificates. This document does not specify a certificate profile.
Two variants are defined using the same CBOR encoding and differing
only in what is being signed:
1. An invertible CBOR re-encoding of DER encoded X.509 certificates
[RFC5280], which can be reversed to obtain the original DER
encoded X.509 certificate.
2. Natively signed C509 certificates, where the signature is
calculated over the CBOR encoding instead of over the DER
encoding as in 1. This removes the need for ASN.1 and DER
parsing and the associated complexity but they are not backwards
compatible with implementations requiring DER encoded X.509.
Natively signed C509 certificates can be applied in devices that are
only required to authenticate to natively signed C509 certificate
compatible servers, which is not a major restriction for many IoT
deployments where the parties issuing and verifying certificates can
be a restricted ecosystem.
This document specifies COSE headers for use of the C509 certificates
with COSE, see Section 11.11. The document also specifies a TLS
certificate type for use of the C509 certificates with TLS and QUIC
(with or without additional TLS certificate compression), see
Section 11.12.
2. Notational Conventions
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.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
This specification makes use of the terminology in [RFC5280],
[RFC7228], [RFC8610], and [RFC8949]. When referring to CBOR, this
specification always refers to Deterministically Encoded CBOR as
specified in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 of [RFC8949].
3. C509 Certificate
This section specifies the content and encoding for C509
certificates, with the overall objective to produce a very compact
representation supporting large parts of [RFC5280], and everything in
[RFC7925], [IEEE-802.1AR], RPKI [RFC6487], GSMA eUICC [GSMA-eUICC],
and CAB Baseline [CAB-TLS] [CAB-Code]. In the CBOR encoding, static
fields are elided, elliptic curve points and time values are
compressed, OID are replaced with short integers, and redundant
encoding is removed. Combining these different components reduces
the certificate size significantly, which is not possible with
general purpose compression algorithms, see Figure 5.
The C509 certificate can be either a CBOR re-encoding of a DER
encoded X.509 certificate, in which case the signature is calculated
on the DER encoded ASN.1 data in the X.509 certificate, or a natively
signed C509 certificate, in which case the signature is calculated
directly on the CBOR encoded data. In both cases the certificate
content is adhering to the restrictions given by [RFC5280]. The re-
encoding is known to work with DER encoded certificates but might
work with other canonical encodings. The re-encoding does not work
for BER encoded certificates.
In the encoding described below, the order of elements in arrays are
always encoded in the same order as the elements or the corresponding
SEQUENCE or SET in the DER encoding.
3.1. Message Fields
The X.509 fields and their CBOR encodings are listed below, and used
in the definition of C509 certificates, see Figure 1.
C509 certificates are defined in terms of DER encoded [RFC5280] X.509
certificates:
* version. The 'version' field is encoded in the
'c509CertificateType' CBOR int. The field 'c509CertificateType'
also indicates the type of the C509 certificate. Currently, the
type can be a natively signed C509 certificate following X.509 v3
(c509CertificateType = 0) or a CBOR re-encoded X.509 v3 DER
certificate (c509CertificateType = 1), see Section 11.1.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
* serialNumber. The 'serialNumber' INTEGER value field is encoded
as the unwrapped CBOR unsigned bignum (~biguint)
'certificateSerialNumber'. Any leading 0x00 byte (to indicate
that the number is not negative) is therefore omitted.
* signature. The 'signature' field is always the same as the
'signatureAlgorithm' field and therefore omitted from the CBOR
encoding.
* issuer. In the general case, the sequence of
'RelativeDistinguishedName' is encoded as a CBOR array of CBOR
arrays of Attributes. Typically, each RelativeDistinguishedName
only contains a single attribute and the sequence is then encoded
as a CBOR array of Attributes. Each Attribute is encoded as a
(CBOR int, CBOR text string) pair or as a (unwrapped CBOR OID,
CBOR bytes) pair. The absolute value of the CBOR int (see
Figure 7) encodes the attribute type and the sign is used to
represent the character string type; positive for Utf8String,
negative for PrintableString. The Attribute Email Address is
always an IA5String. In natively signed C509 certificates all
text strings are UTF-8 encoded and all attributeType SHALL have be
non-negative. Text strings SHALL still adhere to any X.509
restrictions, i.e., serialNumber SHALL only contain the 74
character subset of ASCII allowed by PrintableString and
countryName SHALL have length 2. The string types teletexString,
universalString, and bmpString are not supported. If Name
contains a single Attribute containing an utf8String encoded
'common name' it is encoded as a CBOR text string. If the text
string contains an EUI-64 of the form "HH-HH-HH-HH-HH-HH-HH-HH"
where 'H' is one of the symbols '0'-'9' or 'A'-'F' it is encoded
as a CBOR byte string of length 8 instead. EUI-64 mapped from a
48-bit MAC address (i.e., of the form "HH-HH-HH-FF-FE-HH-HH-HH) is
encoded as a CBOR byte string of length 6.
* validity. The 'notBefore' and 'notAfter' fields are encoded as
unwrapped CBOR epoch-based date/time (~time) where the tag content
is an unsigned integer. In POSIX time, leap seconds are ignored,
with a leap second having the same POSIX time as the second before
it. Compression of X.509 certificates with the time 23:59:60 UTC
is therefore not supported. Note that RFC 5280 mandates encoding
of dates through the year 2049 as UTCTime, and later dates as
GeneralizedTime. The value "99991231235959Z" (no expiration date)
is encoded as CBOR null.
* subject. The 'subject' is encoded exactly like issuer.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
* subjectPublicKeyInfo. The 'AlgorithmIdentifier' field including
parameters is encoded as the CBOR int 'subjectPublicKeyAlgorithm'
(see Section 11.10) or as an array with an unwrapped CBOR OID tag
[RFC9090] optionally followed by the parameters encoded as a CBOR
byte string. In general, the 'subjectPublicKey' BIT STRING value
field is encoded as a CBOR byte string. This specification
assumes the BIT STRING has zero unused bits and the unused bits
byte is omitted. For rsaEncryption and id-ecPublicKey, the
encoding of subjectPublicKey is further optimized as described in
Section 3.2.
* issuerUniqueID. Not supported.
* subjectUniqueID. Not supported.
* extensions. The 'extensions' field is encoded as a CBOR array
where each extension is encoded as either a CBOR int (see
Section 11.3) followed by an optional CBOR item of any type or an
unwrapped CBOR OID tag [RFC9090] followed by a CBOR bool encoding
'critical' and the DER encoded value of the 'extnValue' encoded as
a CBOR byte string. If the array contains exactly two ints and
the absolute value of the first int is 2 (corresponding to
keyUsage), the array is omitted and the extensions is encoded as a
single CBOR int with the absolute value of the second int and the
sign of the first int. Extensions are encoded as specified in
Section 3.3. The extensions mandated to be supported by [RFC7925]
and [IEEE-802.1AR] are given special treatment. An omitted
'extensions' field is encoded as an empty CBOR array.
* signatureAlgorithm. The 'signatureAlgorithm' field including
parameters is encoded as a CBOR int (see Section 11.9) or as an
array with an unwrapped CBOR OID tag [RFC9090] optionally followed
by the parameters encoded as a CBOR byte string.
* signatureValue. In general, the 'signatureValue' BIT STRING value
field is encoded as the CBOR byte string issuerSignatureValue.
This specification assumes the BIT STRING has zero unused bits and
the unused bits byte is omitted. For natively signed C509
certificates the signatureValue is calculated over the CBOR
sequence TBSCertificate. For ECDSA, the encoding of
issuerSignatureValue is further optimized as described in
Section 3.2
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
The following Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL) defines the
CBOR array C509Certificate and the CBOR sequence [RFC8742]
TBSCertificate. The member names therefore only have documentary
value. Applications not requiring a CBOR item MAY represent C509
certificates with the CBOR sequence ~C509Certificate (unwrapped
C509Certificate).
C509Certificate = [
TBSCertificate,
issuerSignatureValue : any,
]
; The elements of the following group are used in a CBOR Sequence:
TBSCertificate = (
c509CertificateType: int,
certificateSerialNumber: CertificateSerialNumber,
issuer: Name,
validityNotBefore: Time,
validityNotAfter: Time,
subject: Name,
subjectPublicKeyAlgorithm: AlgorithmIdentifier,
subjectPublicKey: any,
extensions: Extensions,
issuerSignatureAlgorithm: AlgorithmIdentifier,
)
CertificateSerialNumber = ~biguint
Name = [ * RelativeDistinguishedName ] / text / bytes
RelativeDistinguishedName = Attribute / [ 2* Attribute ]
Attribute = ( attributeType: int, attributeValue: text ) //
( attributeType: ~oid, attributeValue: bytes )
Time = ~time / null
AlgorithmIdentifier = int / ~oid /
[ algorithm: ~oid, parameters: bytes ]
Extensions = [ * Extension ] / int
Extension = ( extensionID: int, extensionValue: any ) //
( extensionID: ~oid, ? critical: true,
extensionValue: bytes )
Figure 1: CDDL for C509Certificate.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
3.2. Encoding of subjectPublicKey and issuerSignatureValue
3.2.1. Encoding of subjectPublicKey
For RSA public keys (rsaEncryption), the SEQUENCE and INTEGER type
and length fields are omitted and the two INTEGER value fields
(modulus, exponent) are encoded as an array of two unwrapped CBOR
unsigned bignum (~biguint), i.e. [ modulus : ~biguint, exponent :
~biguint ]. If the exponent is 65537, the array and the exponent is
omitted and subjectPublicKey consist of only the modulus encoded as
an unwrapped CBOR unsigned bignum (~biguint).
For elliptic curve public keys in Weierstrass form (id-ecPublicKey),
uncompressed keys are point compressed as defined in Section 2.3.3 of
[SECG]. If a DER encoded certificate with a point compressed public
key of type id-ecPublicKey is CBOR encoded, the octets 0xfe and 0xfd
are used instead of 0x02 and 0x03 in the CBOR encoding to represent
even and odd y-coordinate, respectively.
3.2.2. Encoding of issuerSignatureValue
For ECDSA signatures, the SEQUENCE and INTEGER type and length fields
as well as the any leading 0x00 byte (to indicate that the number is
not negative) are omitted. If the two INTEGER value fields have
different lengths, the shortest INTEGER value field is padded with
zeroes so that the two fields have the same length. The resulting
byte string is encoded as a CBOR byte string.
3.3. Encoding of Extensions
This section details the encoding of the 'extensions' field. The
'extensions' field is encoded as a CBOR array where each extensionID
is encoded as either a CBOR int or an unwrapped CBOR OID tag. If
'extensionID' is encoded an int (see Section 11.3), the sign is used
to encode if the extension is critical and the 'critical' field is
omitted. Critical extensions are encoded with a negative sign and
non-critical extensions are encoded with a positive sign.
The 'extnValue' OCTET STRING value field is encoded as the CBOR byte
string 'extensionValue' except for the extensions specified below.
For some extensions, only commonly used parts are supported by the
CBOR encoding. If unsupported parts are used, the CBOR encoding
cannot be used.
CBOR encoding of the following extension values are fully supported:
* Subject Key Identifier (subjectKeyIdentifier). The extensionValue
is encoded as follows:
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
KeyIdentifier = bytes
SubjectKeyIdentifier = KeyIdentifier
* Key Usage (keyUsage). The 'KeyUsage' BIT STRING is interpreted as
an unsigned integer in network byte order and encoded as a CBOR
int. See Section 3.1 for special encoding in case keyUsage is the
only extension present.
KeyUsage = int
* Policy Mappings (policyMappings). extensionValue is encoded as
follows:
PolicyMappings = [
+ (issuerDomainPolicy: ~oid, subjectDomainPolicy: ~oid)
]
* Basic Constraints (basicConstraints). If 'cA' = false then
extensionValue = -2, if 'cA' = true and 'pathLenConstraint' is not
present then extensionValue = -1, and if 'cA' = true and
'pathLenConstraint' is present then extensionValue =
pathLenConstraint.
BasicConstraints = int
* Policy Constraints (policyConstraints). extensionValue is encoded
as follows:
PolicyConstraints = [
requireExplicitPolicy: uint / null,
inhibitPolicyMapping: uint / null,
]
* Extended Key Usage (extKeyUsage). extensionValue is encoded as an
array of CBOR ints (see Section 11.7 or unwrapped CBOR OID tags
[RFC9090] where each int or OID tag encodes a key usage purpose.
If the array contains a single KeyPurposeId, the array is omitted.
KeyPurposeId = int / ~oid
ExtKeyUsageSyntax = [ 2* KeyPurposeId ] / KeyPurposeId
* Inhibit anyPolicy (inhibitAnyPolicy). extensionValue is encoded as
follows:
InhibitAnyPolicy = uint
CBOR encoding of the following extension values are partly supported:
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
* Subject Alternative Name (subjectAltName). If the subject
alternative name only contains general names registered in
Section 11.8 the extension value can be CBOR encoded.
extensionValue is encoded as an array of (int, any) pairs where
each pair encodes a general name (see Section 11.8). If
subjectAltName contains exactly one dNSName, the array and the int
are omitted and extensionValue is the dNSName encoded as a CBOR
text string. In addition to the general names defined in
[RFC5280], the hardwareModuleName type of otherName has been given
its own int due to its mandatory use in IEEE 802.1AR. When
'otherName + hardwareModuleName' is used, then [ oid, bytes ] is
used to identify the pair ( hwType, hwSerialEntries ) directly as
specified in [RFC4108]. Only the general names in Section 11.8
are supported.
GeneralName = ( GeneralNameType : int, GeneralNameValue : any )
GeneralNames = [ + GeneralName ]
SubjectAltName = GeneralNames / text
* Issuer Alternative Name (issuerAltName). extensionValue is encoded
exactly like subjectAltName.
IssuerAltName = GeneralNames / text
* CRL Distribution Points (cRLDistributionPoints). If the CRL
Distribution Points is a sequence of DistributionPointName, where
each DistributionPointName only contains
uniformResourceIdentifiers, the extension value can be CBOR
encoded. extensionValue is encoded as follows:
DistributionPointName = [ 2* text ] / text
CRLDistributionPoints = [ + DistributionPointName ]
* Freshest CRL (freshestCRL). extensionValue is encoded exactly like
cRLDistributionPoints.
FreshestCRL = CRLDistributionPoints
* Authority Information Access (authorityInfoAccess). If all the
GeneralNames in authorityInfoAccess are of type
uniformResourceIdentifier, the extension value can be CBOR
encoded. Each accessMethod is encoded as an CBOR ints (see
Section 11.6) or unwrapped CBOR OID tags [RFC9090]. The
uniformResourceIdentifiers are encoded as CBOR text strings.
AccessDescription = ( accessMethod: int / ~oid , uri: text )
AuthorityInfoAccessSyntax = [ + AccessDescription ]
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
* Subject Information Access (subjectInfoAccess). Encoded exactly
like authorityInfoAccess.
SubjectInfoAccessSyntax = AuthorityInfoAccessSyntax
* Authority Key Identifier (authorityKeyIdentifier). If the
authority key identifier contains all of keyIdentifier,
certIssuer, and certSerialNumberm or if only keyIdentifier is
present the extension value can be CBOR encoded. If all three are
present a CBOR array is used, if only keyIdentifier is present,
the array is omitted:
KeyIdentifierArray = [
keyIdentifier: KeyIdentifier,
authorityCertIssuer: GeneralNames,
authorityCertSerialNumber: CertificateSerialNumber
]
AuthorityKeyIdentifier = KeyIdentifierArray / KeyIdentifier
* Certificate Policies (certificatePolicies). If noticeRef is not
used and any explicitText are encoded as UTF8String, the extension
value can be CBOR encoded. OIDs registered in Section 11.4 are
encoded as an int. The policyQualifierId is encoded as an CBOR
int (see Section 11.5) or an unwrapped CBOR OID tag [RFC9090].
PolicyIdentifier = int / ~oid
PolicyQualifierInfo = (
policyQualifierId: int / ~oid,
qualifier: text,
)
CertificatePolicies = [
+ ( PolicyIdentifier, ? [ + PolicyQualifierInfo ] )
]
* Name Constraints (nameConstraints). If the name constraints only
contains general names registered in Section 11.8 the extension
value can be CBOR encoded.
GeneralSubtree = [ GeneralName, minimum: uint, ? maximum: uint ]
NameConstraints = [
permittedSubtrees: GeneralSubtree,
excludedSubtrees: GeneralSubtree,
]
* Subject Directory Attributes (subjectDirectoryAttributes).
Encoded as attributes in issuer and subject with the difference
that there can be more than one attributeValue.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
Attributes = ( attributeType: int, attributeValue: [+text] ) //
( attributeType: ~oid, attributeValue: [+bytes] )
SubjectDirectoryAttributes = Attributes
* AS Resources (autonomousSysIds). If rdi is not present, the
extension value can be CBOR encoded. Each ASId is encoded as an
uint. With the exception of the first ASId, the ASid is encoded
as the difference to the previous ASid.
AsIdsOrRanges = uint / [uint, uint]
ASIdentifiers = [ + AsIdsOrRanges ] / null
* AS Resources v2 (id-pe-ipAddrBlocks-v2). Encoded exactly like
autonomousSysIds.
* IP Resources (id-pe-ipAddrBlocks). If rdi and SAFI is not
present, the extension value can be CBOR encoded. Each
AddressPrefix is encoded as a CBOR bytes string (without the
unused bits octet) followed by the number of unused bits encoded
as a CBOR uint. Each AddressRange is encoded as an array of two
CBOR byte strings. The unused bits for min and max are omitted,
but the unused bits in max IPAddress is set to ones. With the
exception of the first Address, if the byte string has the same
length as the previous ASid, the Addess is encoded as an uint with
the the difference to the previous Addess.
Address = bytes / uint,
AddressPrefix = (Address, unusedBits: uint)
AddressRange = [Address, Address]
IPAddressOrRange = AddressPrefix / AddressRange
IPAddressChoice = [ + IPAddressOrRange ] / null
IPAddrBlocks = [ AFI: uint, IPAddressChoice ]
* IP Resources v2 (id-pe-ipAddrBlocks-v2). Encoded exactly like id-
pe-ipAddrBlocks.
* Signed Certificate Timestamp. If all the SCTs are version 1, and
there are no SCT extensions, the extension value can be CBOR
encoded. LogIDs are encoded as CBOR byte strings, the timestamp
is encoded as and CBOR int (milliseconds since validityNotBefore),
and the signature is encoded with an (AlgorithmIdentifier, any)
pair in the same way as issuerSignatureAlgorithm and
issuerSignatureValue.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
SignedCerticateTimestamp = (
logID: bytes,
timestamp: int,
sigAlg: AlgorithmIdentifier,
sigValue: any,
)
SignedCertificateTimestamps = [ + SignedCerticateTimestamp ]
3.3.1. Example Encoding of Extensions
The examples below use values from Section 11.3, Section 11.7, and
Section 11.8:
* A critical basicConstraints ('cA' = true) without
pathLenConstraint is encoded as the two CBOR ints -4, -1.
* A non-critical keyUsage with digitalSignature and keyAgreement
asserted is encoded as the two CBOR ints 2, 17 (2^0 + 2^4 = 17).
* A non-critical extKeyUsage containing id-kp-codeSigning and id-kp-
OCSPSigning is encoded as the CBOR int 8 followed by the CBOR
array [ 3, 6 ].
* A non-critical subjectAltName containing only the dNSName
example.com is encoded as the CBOR int 3 followed by the CBOR text
string "example.com".
Thus, the extension field of a certificate containing all of the
above extensions in the given order would be encoded as the CBOR
array [ -4, -1, 2, 17, 8, [ 3, 6 ], 3, "example.com" ].
4. C509 Certificate Signing Request
The section defines the C509 Certificate Signing Request (CSR) format
based on and compatible with RFC 2986 [RFC2986] reusing the
formatting for C509 certificates defined in Section 3. There are
currently two c509CertificateSigningRequestType values defined,
c509CertificateSigningRequestType = 0 requests a c509CertificateType
= 0 and c509CertificateSigningRequestType = 1 requests a
c509CertificateType = 1 . subjectProofOfPossessionAlgorithm can be a
C509 signature algorithm or a non-signature Proof-of-Possession
Algorithm as defined in e.g. RFC 6955. CSR attributes other than
extensionRequest are not supported.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
C509CertificateSigningRequest = [
TBSCertificateSigningRequest,
subjectProofOfPossessionValue: any,
]
; The elements of the following group are used in a CBOR Sequence:
TBSCertificateSigningRequest = (
c509CertificateSigningRequestType: int,
subject: Name,
subjectPublicKeyAlgorithm: AlgorithmIdentifier,
subjectPublicKey: any,
extensionsRequest : Extensions,
subjectProofOfPossessionAlgorithm: AlgorithmIdentifier,
)
Figure 2: CDDL for C509CertificateSigningRequest.
After verifying the subjectProofOfPossessionValue, the CA MAY
transform the C509CertificateSigningRequest into a RFC 2985
CertificationRequestInfo for compatibility with existing procedures
and code.
5. C509 Certificate Revocation List
The section defines the C509 Certificate Revocation List (CRL) format
based on and compatible with [RFC5280] reusing the formatting for
C509 certificates defined in Section 3.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
C509CertificateRevocationList = [
TBSCertificateRevocationList,
issuerSignatureValue : any,
]
; The elements of the following group are used in a CBOR Sequence:
TBSCertificateSigningRequest = (
C509CertificateRevocationListType: int,
issuer: Name,
thisUpdate: Time,
nextUpdate: Time,
revokedCertificates: RevokedCertificates,
crlExtensions: Extensions,
issuerSignatureAlgorithm: AlgorithmIdentifier,
)
RevokedCertificates = [
userCertificate: CertificateSerialNumber,
revocationDate: Time,
crlEntryExtensions: Extensions,
]
Figure 3: CDDL for C509CertificateRevocationList.
6. C509 Online Certificate Status Protocol
TODO
7. C509 Processing and Certificate Issuance
It is straightforward to integrate the C509 format into legacy X.509
processing during certificate issuance. C509 processing can be
performed as an isolated function of the CA, or as a separate
function trusted by the CA.
The CSR format defined in Section 4 follows the PKCS#10 format to
enable a direct mapping to the certification request information, see
Section 4.1 of [RFC2986].
When a certificate request is received the CA, or function trusted by
the CA, needs to perform some limited C509 processing and verify the
proof of possession of the public key, before normal certificate
generation can take place.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
In the reverse direction, in case c509CertificateType = 1 was
requested, a separate C509 processing function can perform the
conversion from a generated X.509 certificate to C509 as a bump-in-
the-wire. In case c509CertificateType = 0 was requested, the C509
processing needs to be performed before signing the certificate, in
which case a tighter integration with CA may be needed.
8. Legacy Considerations
C509 certificates can be deployed with legacy X.509 certificates and
CA infrastructure. In order to verify the signature, the C509
certificate is used to recreate the original X.509 data structure to
be able to verify the signature.
For protocols like TLS/DTLS 1.2, where the handshake is sent
unencrypted, the actual encoding and compression can be done at
different locations depending on the deployment setting. For
example, the mapping between C509 certificate and standard X.509
certificate can take place in a 6LoWPAN border gateway which allows
the server side to stay unmodified. This case gives the advantage of
the low overhead of a C509 certificate over a constrained wireless
links. The conversion to X.509 within an IoT device will incur a
computational overhead, however, measured in energy this is likely to
be negligible compared to the reduced communication overhead.
For the setting with constrained server and server-only
authentication, the server only needs to be provisioned with the C509
certificate and does not perform the conversion to X.509. This
option is viable when client authentication can be asserted by other
means.
For protocols like IKEv2, TLS/DTLS 1.3, and EDHOC, where certificates
are encrypted, the proposed encoding needs to be done fully end-to-
end, through adding the encoding/decoding functionality to the
server.
9. Expected Certificate Sizes
The CBOR encoding of the sample certificate chains given in
Appendix A results in the numbers shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5.
COSE_X509 is defined in [I-D.ietf-cose-x509] and COSE_C509 is defined
in Section 11.11. After RFC 7925 profiling, most duplicated
information has been removed, and the remaining text strings are
minimal in size. Therefore, the further size reduction reached with
general compression mechanisms such as Brotli will be small, mainly
corresponding to making the ASN.1 encoding more compact. CBOR
encoding can however significantly compress RFC 7925 profiled
certificates. For the example HTTPS certificate chains (www.ietf.org
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
and tools.ietf.org) both C509 and Brotli perform well complementing
each other. C509 use dedicated information to compress individual
certificates, while Brotli can compress duplicate information in the
entire chain. Note that C509 certificates of type 0 and 1 have the
same size. For Brotli [RFC7932], the Rust crate Brotli 3.3.0 was
used with compression level 11 and window size 22.
+---------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
| | COSE_X509 | COSE_C509 |
+---------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
| RFC 7925 profiled IoT Certificate (1) | 317 | 139 |
+---------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
| ECDSA HTTPS Certificate Chain (2) | 2193 | 1394 |
+---------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
| RSA HTTPS Certificate Chain (4) | 5175 | 3934 |
+---------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
Figure 4: Comparing Sizes of Certificate Chains in COSE. Number
of bytes (length of certificate chain).
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
| | X509 | X509 + Brotli | C509 | C509 + Brotli |
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
| RFC 7925 Cert (1) | 327 | 324 | 151 | 167 |
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
| RPKI Cert (1) | 20991 | 9134 | 8660 | 5668 |
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
| HTTPS Chain (2) | 2204 | 1455 | 1414 | 1063 |
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
| HTTPS Chain (4) | 5190 | 3244 | 3958 | 2845 |
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
| HTTPS Bag (8) | 11578 | 3979 | 8882 | 3519 |
+-------------------+-------+---------------+------+---------------+
Figure 5: Comparing Sizes of Certificate Chains with TLS. Number
of bytes (length of certificate chain). X509 and C509 are
Certificate messages. X509 + Brotli and C509 + Brotli are
CompressedCertificate messages.
10. Security Considerations
The CBOR profiling of X.509 certificates does not change the security
assumptions needed when deploying standard X.509 certificates but
decreases the number of fields transmitted, which reduces the risk
for implementation errors.
The use of natively signed C509 certificates removes the need for
ASN.1 encoding, which is a rich source of security vulnerabilities.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
Conversion between the certificate formats can be made in constant
time to reduce risk of information leakage through side channels.
The mechanism in this draft does not reveal any additional
information compared to X.509. Because of difference in size, it
will be possible to detect that this profile is used. The gateway
solution described in Section 8 requires unencrypted certificates and
is not recommended.
11. IANA Considerations
This document creates several new registries under the new heading
"C509 Certificate". For all items, the 'Reference' field points to
this document.
The expert reviewers for the registries defined in this document are
expected to ensure that the usage solves a valid use case that could
not be solved better in a different way, that it is not going to
duplicate one that is already registered, and that the registered
point is likely to be used in deployments. They are furthermore
expected to check the clarity of purpose and use of the requested
code points. Experts should take into account the expected usage of
entries when approving point assignment, and the length of the
encoded value should be weighed against the number of code points
left that encode to that size and how constrained the systems it will
be used on are. Values in the interval [-24, 23] have a 1 byte
encodings, other values in the interval [-256, 255] have a 2 byte
encodings, and the remaining values in the interval [-65536, 65535]
have 3 byte encodings.
11.1. C509 Certificate Types Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Certificate Types" under
the new heading "C509 Certificate". The columns of the registry are
Value, Description, and Reference, where Value is an integer, and the
other columns are text strings. For values in the interval [-24, 23]
the registration procedure is "IETF Review" and "Expert Review". For
all other values the registration procedure is "Expert Review". The
initial contents of the registry are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Description |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 0 | Natively Signed C509 Certificate following X.509 v3 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | CBOR re-encoding of X.509 v3 Certificate |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
Figure 6: C509 Certificate Types
11.2. C509 Attributes Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Attributes" under the
new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509 Certificates)".
The columns of the registry are Value, Name, Identifiers, OID, DER,
Comments, and Reference, where Value is an non-negative integer, and
the other columns are text strings. For values in the interval [0,
23] the registration procedure is "IETF Review" and "Expert Review".
For all other values the registration procedure is "Expert Review".
The initial contents of the registry are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Attribute |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 0 | Name: Email Address |
| | Identifiers: emailAddress, e-mailAddress |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.9.1 |
| | DER: 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 09 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Name: Common Name |
| | Identifiers: commonName, cn |
| | OID: 2.5.4.3 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 03 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: Surname |
| | Identifiers: surname, sn |
| | OID: 2.5.4.4 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 04 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: Serial Number |
| | Identifiers: serialNumber |
| | OID: 2.5.4.5 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 05 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | Name: Country |
| | Identifiers: countryName, c |
| | OID: 2.5.4.6 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 06 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 5 | Name: Locality |
| | Identifiers: localityName, locality, l |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | OID: 2.5.4.7 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 07 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 6 | Name: State or Province |
| | Identifiers: stateOrProvinceName, st |
| | OID: 2.5.4.8 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 08 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | Name: Street Address |
| | Identifiers: streetAddress, street |
| | OID: 2.5.4.9 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 09 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Name: Organization |
| | Identifiers: organizationName, o |
| | OID: 2.5.4.10 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 0A |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 9 | Name: Organizational Unit |
| | Identifiers: organizationalUnitName, ou |
| | OID: 2.5.4.11 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 0B |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 10 | Name: Title |
| | Identifiers: title |
| | OID: 2.5.4.12 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 0C |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 11 | Name: Business Category |
| | Identifiers: businessCategory |
| | OID: 2.5.4.15 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 0F |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 12 | Name: Postal Code |
| | Identifiers: postalCode |
| | OID: 2.5.4.17 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 11 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 13 | Name: Given Name |
| | Identifiers: givenName |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | OID: 2.5.4.42 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 2A |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 14 | Name: Initials |
| | Identifiers: initials |
| | OID: 2.5.4.43 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 2B |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 15 | Name: Generation Qualifier |
| | Identifiers: generationQualifier |
| | OID: 2.5.4.44 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 2C |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 16 | Name: DN Qualifier |
| | Identifiers: dnQualifier |
| | OID: 2.5.4.46 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 2E |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 17 | Name: Pseudonym |
| | Identifiers: pseudonym |
| | OID: 2.5.4.65 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 41 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 18 | Name: Organization Identifier |
| | Identifiers: organizationIdentifier |
| | OID: 2.5.4.97 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 04 61 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 19 | Name: Inc. Locality |
| | Identifiers: jurisdictionOfIncorporationLocalityName |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.1 |
| | DER: 06 0B 2B 06 01 04 01 82 37 3C 02 01 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 20 | Name: Inc. State or Province |
| | Identifiers: jurisdictionOfIncorporation |
| | StateOrProvinceName |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.2 |
| | DER: 06 0B 2B 06 01 04 01 82 37 3C 02 01 02 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 21 | Name: Inc. Country |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Identifiers: jurisdictionOfIncorporationCountryName |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.3 |
| | DER: 06 0B 2B 06 01 04 01 82 37 3C 02 01 03 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 21 | Name: Domain Component |
| | Identifiers: domainComponent, dc |
| | OID: 0.9.2342.19200300.100.1.25 |
| | DER: 06 0A 09 92 26 89 93 F2 2C 64 01 19 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 7: C509 Attributes
11.3. C509 Extensions Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Extensions Registry"
under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, DER, Comments, extensionValue, and Reference, where
Value is an positive integer, and the other columns are text strings.
For values in the interval [1, 23] the registration procedure is
"IETF Review" and "Expert Review". For all other values the
registration procedure is "Expert Review". The initial contents of
the registry are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Extension |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 1 | Name: Subject Key Identifier |
| | Identifiers: subjectKeyIdentifier |
| | OID: 2.5.29.14 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 0E |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: SubjectKeyIdentifier |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: Key Usage |
| | Identifiers: keyUsage |
| | OID: 2.5.29.15 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 0F |
| | Comments: |
| | AttributeValue: KeyUsage |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: Subject Alternative Name |
| | Identifiers: subjectAltName |
| | OID: 2.5.29.17 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 11 |
| | Comments: |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | extensionValue: SubjectAltName |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | Name: Basic Constraints |
| | Identifiers: basicConstraints |
| | OID: 2.5.29.19 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 13 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: BasicConstraints |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 5 | Name: CRL Distribution Points |
| | Identifiers: cRLDistributionPoints |
| | OID: 2.5.29.31 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 1F |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: CRLDistributionPoints |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 6 | Name: Certificate Policies |
| | Identifiers: certificatePolicies |
| | OID: 2.5.29.32 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 20 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: CertificatePolicies |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | Name: Authority Key Identifier |
| | Identifiers: authorityKeyIdentifier |
| | OID: 2.5.29.35 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 23 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: AuthorityKeyIdentifier |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Name: Extended Key Usage |
| | Identifiers: extKeyUsage |
| | OID: 2.5.29.37 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 25 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: ExtKeyUsageSyntax |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 9 | Name: Authority Information Access |
| | Identifiers: authorityInfoAccess |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.1.1 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 01 01 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: AuthorityInfoAccessSyntax |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 10 | Name: Signed Certificate Timestamp List |
| | Identifiers: |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.11129.2.4.2 |
| | DER: 06 0A 2B 06 01 04 01 D6 79 02 04 02 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: SignedCertificateTimestamps |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 24 | Name: Subject Directory Attributes |
| | Identifiers: subjectDirectoryAttributes |
| | OID: 2.5.29.9 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 09 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: SubjectDirectoryAttributes |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 25 | Name: Issuer Alternative Name |
| | Identifiers: issuerAltName |
| | OID: 2.5.29.18 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 12 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: IssuerAltName |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 26 | Name: Name Constraints |
| | Identifiers: nameConstraints |
| | OID: 2.5.29.30 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 1E |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: NameConstraints |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 27 | Name: Policy Mappings |
| | Identifiers: policyMappings |
| | OID: 2.5.29.33 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 21 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: PolicyMappings |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 28 | Name: Policy Constraints |
| | Identifiers: policyConstraints |
| | OID: 2.5.29.36 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 24 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: PolicyConstraints |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 29 | Name: Freshest CRL |
| | Identifiers: freshestCRL |
| | OID: 2.5.29.46 |
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 2E |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: FreshestCRL |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 30 | Name: Inhibit anyPolicy |
| | Identifiers: inhibitAnyPolicy |
| | OID: 2.5.29.54 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | DER: 06 03 55 1D 36 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: InhibitAnyPolicy |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 31 | Name: Subject Information Access |
| | Identifiers: subjectInfoAccess |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.1.11 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 01 0B |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: SubjectInfoAccessSyntax |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 32 | Name: IP Resources |
| | Identifiers: ipAddrBlocks |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.1.7 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 01 07 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: IPAddrBlocks |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 33 | Name: AS Resources |
| | Identifiers: autonomousSysIds |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.1.8 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 01 08 |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: ASIdentifiers |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 34 | Name: IP Resources v2 |
| | Identifiers: ipAddrBlocks-v2 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.1.28 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 01 1C |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: IPAddrBlocks |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 35 | Name: AS Resources v2 |
| | Identifiers: autonomousSysIds-v2 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.1.29 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 01 1D |
| | Comments: |
| | extensionValue: ASIdentifiers |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 8: C509 Extensions
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
11.4. C509 Certificate Policies Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Certificate Policies
Registry" under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, DER, Comments, and Reference, where Value is an
integer, and the other columns are text strings. For values in the
interval [-24, 23] the registration procedure is "IETF Review" and
"Expert Review". For all other values the registration procedure is
"Expert Review". The initial contents of the registry are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Certificate Policy |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 0 | Name: Any Policy |
| | Identifiers: anyPolicy |
| | OID: 2.5.29.32.0 |
| | DER: 06 04 55 1D 20 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Name: Domain Validation (DV) |
| | Identifiers: domain-validated |
| | OID: 2.23.140.1.2.1 |
| | DER: 06 06 67 81 0C 01 02 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: Organization Validation (OV) |
| | Identifiers: organization-validated |
| | OID: 2.23.140.1.2.2 |
| | DER: 06 06 67 81 0C 01 02 02 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: Individual Validation (IV) |
| | Identifiers: individual-validated |
| | OID: 2.23.140.1.2.3 |
| | DER: 06 06 67 81 0C 01 02 03 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | Name: Extended Validation (EV) |
| | Identifiers: ev-guidelines |
| | OID: 2.23.140.1.1 |
| | DER: 06 05 67 81 0C 01 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | Name: Resource PKI (RPKI) |
| | Identifiers: id-cp-ipAddr-asNumber |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.14.2 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 0E 02 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Name: Resource PKI (RPKI) (Alternative) |
| | Identifiers: id-cp-ipAddr-asNumber-v2 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.14.3 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 0E 03 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 10 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | Certificate Issuer |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-ci |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.0 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 11 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | eUICC |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-euicc |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.1 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 12 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | eUICC Manufacturer |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-eum |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.2 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 02 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 13 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | SM-DP+ TLS |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-dp-tls |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.3 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 03 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 14 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | SM-DP+ Authentication |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-dp-auth |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.4 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 04 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 15 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | SM-DP+ Profile Binding |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-dp-pb |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.5 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 05 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 16 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | SM-DS TLS |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-ds-tls |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.6 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 06 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 17 | Name: Remote SIM Provisioning Role |
| | SM-DS Authentication |
| | Identifiers: id-rspRole-ds-auth |
| | OID: 2.23.146.1.2.1.7 |
| | DER: 06 07 67 81 12 01 02 01 07 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 9: C509 Certificate Policies
11.5. C509 Policies Qualifiers Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Policies Qualifiers
Registry" under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, DER, Comments, and Reference, where Value is an
integer, and the other columns are text strings. For values in the
interval [-24, 23] the registration procedure is "IETF Review" and
"Expert Review". For all other values the registration procedure is
"Expert Review". The initial contents of the registry are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Certificate Policy |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 1 | Name: Certification Practice Statement |
| | Identifiers: id-qt-cps, cps |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.2.1 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 02 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: User Notice |
| | Identifiers: id-qt-unotice, unotice |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.2.2 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 02 02 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 10: C509 Policies Qualifiers
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
11.6. C509 Information Access Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Information Access
Registry" under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, DER, Comments, and Reference, where Value is an
integer, and the other columns are text strings. For values in the
interval [-24, 23] the registration procedure is "IETF Review" and
"Expert Review". For all other values the registration procedure is
"Expert Review". The initial contents of the registry are:
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Information Access |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 1 | Name: OCSP |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-ocsp, id-pkix-ocsp |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.1 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 01 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: CA Issuers |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-caIssuers, caIssuers |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.2 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 02 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: Time Stamping |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-timeStamping, timeStamping |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.3 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 03 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 5 | Name: CA Repository |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-caRepository |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.5 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 05 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 10 | Name: RPKI Manifest |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-rpkiManifest |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.10 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 0A |
| | Comments: RFC 6487 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 11 | Name: Signed Object |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-signedObject |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.11 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 0B |
| | Comments: RFC 6487 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 13 | Name: RPKI Notify |
| | Identifiers: id-ad-rpkiNotify |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.48.13 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 30 0D |
| | Comments: RFC 8182 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 11: C509 Information Accesses
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
11.7. C509 Extended Key Usages Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Extended Key Usages
Registry" under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, DER, Comments, and Reference, where Value is an
integer, and the other columns are text strings. For values in the
interval [-24, 23] the registration procedure is "IETF Review" and
"Expert Review". For all other values the registration procedure is
"Expert Review". The initial contents of the registry are:
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Extended Key Usage |
+=======+=========================================================+
| 0 | Name: Any Extended Key Usage |
| | Identifiers: anyExtendedKeyUsage |
| | OID: 2.5.29.37.0 |
| | DER: 06 04 55 1D 25 00 |
| | Comments: RFC 5280 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Name: TLS Server authentication |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-serverAuth |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.1 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 01 |
| | Comments: RFC 5280 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: TLS Client Authentication |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-clientAuth |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.2 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 02 |
| | Comments: RFC 5280 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: Code Signing |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-codeSigning |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.3 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 03 |
| | Comments: RFC 5280 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | Name: Email protection (S/MIME) |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-emailProtection |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.4 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 04 |
| | Comments: RFC 5280 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Name: Time Stamping |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-timeStamping, timestamping |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.8 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 08 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 9 | Name: OCSP Signing |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-OCSPSigning |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.9 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 09 |
| | Comments: RFC 5280 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 10 | Name: Kerberos PKINIT Client Auth |
| | Identifiers: id-pkinit-KPClientAuth |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.2.3.4 |
| | DER: 06 07 2B 06 01 05 02 03 04 |
| | Comments: RFC 4556 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 11 | Name: Kerberos PKINIT KDC |
| | Identifiers: id-pkinit-KPKdc |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.2.3.5 |
| | DER: 06 07 2B 06 01 05 02 03 05 |
| | Comments: RFC 4556 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 12 | Name: SSH Client |
| | Identifiers: id-kp-secureShellClient |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.21 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 15 |
| | Comments: RFC 6187 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
| 13 | Name: Kerberos PKINIT KDC |
| | Identifiers: id-pkinit-KPKdc |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.3.22 |
| | DER: 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 03 16 |
| | Comments: RFC 6187 |
+-------+---------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 12: C509 Extended Key Usages
11.8. C509 General Names Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 General Names Registry"
under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, General Name,
and Reference, where Value is an integer, and the other columns are
text strings. For values in the interval [-24, 23] the registration
procedure is "IETF Review" and "Expert Review". For all other values
the registration procedure is "Expert Review". The initial contents
of the registry are:
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | General Names |
+=======+===========================================================+
| -2 | Name: otherName with SmtpUTF8Mailbox |
| | Comments: id-on-SmtpUTF8Mailbox |
| | (1.3.6.1.5.5.7.8.9) |
| | 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 08 09 |
| | Value: text |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| -1 | Name: otherName with hardwareModuleName |
| | Comments: id-on-hardwareModuleNamee |
| | (1.3.6.1.5.5.7.8.4) |
| | 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 08 04 |
| | Value: [ ~oid, bytes ] |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | Name: otherName |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: [ ~oid, bytes ] |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Name: rfc822Name |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: text |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: dNSName |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: text |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | Name: directoryName |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: Name |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 6 | Name: uniformResourceIdentifier |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: text |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | Name: iPAddress |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: bytes |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Name: registeredID |
| | Comments: |
| | Value: ~oid |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 13: C509 General Names
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
11.9. C509 Signature Algorithms Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Signature Algorithms"
under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, Parameters, DER, Comments, and Reference, where
Value is an integer, and the other columns are text strings. For
values in the interval [-24, 23] the registration procedure is "IETF
Review" and "Expert Review". For all other values the registration
procedure is "Expert Review". The initial contents of the registry
are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | X.509 Signature Algorithms |
+=======+===========================================================+
| -256 | Name: RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 with SHA-1 |
| | Identifiers: sha1-with-rsa-signature, |
| | sha1WithRSAEncryption, |
| | sha-1WithRSAEncryption |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.5 |
| | Parameters: NULL |
| | DER: 30 0D 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 05 05 00 |
| | Comments: Don't use |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| -255 | Name: ECDSA with SHA-1 |
| | Identifiers: ecdsa-with-SHA1 |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.4.1 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 09 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 04 01 |
| | Comments: Don't use. Compressed signature value |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | Name: ECDSA with SHA-256 |
| | Identifiers: ecdsa-with-SHA256 |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.4.3.2 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2A 86 48 CE 3D 04 03 02 |
| | Comments: Compressed signature value |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Name: ECDSA with SHA-384 |
| | Identifiers: ecdsa-with-SHA384 |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.4.3.3 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2A 86 48 CE 3D 04 03 03 |
| | Comments: Compressed signature value |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: ECDSA with SHA-512 |
| | Identifiers: ecdsa-with-SHA512 |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.4.3.4 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2A 86 48 CE 3D 04 03 04 |
| | Comments: Compressed signature value |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: ECDSA with SHAKE128 |
| | Identifiers: id-ecdsa-with-shake128 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.6.32 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 06 20 |
| | Comments: Compressed signature value |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | Name: ECDSA with SHAKE256 |
| | Identifiers: id-ecdsa-with-shake256 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.6.33 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 06 21 |
| | Comments: Compressed signature value |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 12 | Name: Ed25519 |
| | Identifiers: id-Ed25519, id-EdDSA25519 |
| | OID: 1.3.101.112 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 05 06 03 2B 65 70 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 13 | Name: Ed448 |
| | Identifiers: id-Ed448, id-EdDSA448 |
| | OID: 1.3.101.113 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 05 06 03 2B 65 71 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 23 | Name: RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 with SHA-256 |
| | Identifiers: sha256WithRSAEncryption |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.11 |
| | Parameters: NULL |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 0B 05 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 24 | Name: RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 with SHA-384 |
| | Identifiers: sha384WithRSAEncryption |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.12 |
| | Parameters: NULL |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 0C 05 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 25 | Name: RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 with SHA-512 |
| | Identifiers: sha512WithRSAEncryption |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.13 |
| | Parameters: NULL |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 0D 05 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 26 | Name: RSASSA-PSS with SHA-256 |
| | Identifiers: rsassa-pss, id-RSASSA-PSS |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.10 |
| | Parameters: SHA-256, MGF-1 with SHA-256, saltLength = 32 |
| | DER: 30 41 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 0A 30 34 |
| | A0 0F 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 |
| | 05 00 A1 1C 30 1A 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 |
| | 01 08 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 |
| | 05 00 a2 03 02 01 20 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 27 | Name: RSASSA-PSS with SHA-384 |
| | Identifiers: rsassa-pss, id-RSASSA-PSS |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.10 |
| | Parameters: SHA-384, MGF-1 with SHA-384, saltLength = 48 |
| | DER: 30 41 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 0A 30 34 |
| | A0 0F 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 02 |
| | 05 00 A1 1C 30 1A 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 |
| | 01 08 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 02 |
| | 05 00 A2 03 02 01 30 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 28 | Name: RSASSA-PSS with SHA-512 |
| | Identifiers: rsassa-pss, id-RSASSA-PSS |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.10 |
| | Parameters: SHA-512, MGF-1 with SHA-512, saltLength = 64 |
| | DER: 30 41 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 01 0A 30 34 |
| | A0 0F 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 03 |
| | 05 00 A1 1C 30 1A 06 09 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 |
| | 01 08 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 03 |
| | 05 00 A2 03 02 01 40 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 29 | Name: RSASSA-PSS with SHAKE128 |
| | Identifiers: id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE128 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.6.30 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 06 1E |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 30 | Name: RSASSA-PSS with SHAKE256 |
| | Identifiers: id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE256 |
| | OID: 1.3.6.1.5.5.7.6.31 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0A 06 08 2B 06 01 05 05 07 06 1F |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 42 | Name: HSS / LMS |
| | Identifiers: id-alg-hss-lms-hashsig, id-alg-mts-hashsig |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.3.17 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0D 06 0B 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 09 10 03 11 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 43 | Name: XMSS |
| | Identifiers: id_alg_xmss |
| | OID: 0.4.0.127.0.15.1.1.13.0 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 04 00 7F 00 0F 01 01 0D 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 44 | Name: XMSS^MT |
| | Identifiers: id_alg_xmssmt |
| | OID: 0.4.0.127.0.15.1.1.14.0 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 04 00 7F 00 0F 01 01 0E 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 14: C509 Signature Algorithms
11.10. C509 Public Key Algorithms Registry
IANA has created a new registry titled "C509 Public Key Algorithms"
under the new heading "CBOR Encoded X509 Certificates (C509
Certificates)". The columns of the registry are Value, Name,
Identifiers, OID, Parameters, DER, Comments, and Reference, where
Value is an integer, and the other columns are text strings. For
values in the interval [-24, 23] the registration procedure is "IETF
Review" and "Expert Review". For all other values the registration
procedure is "Expert Review". T The initial contents of the registry
are:
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Value | X.509 Public Key Algorithms |
+=======+===========================================================+
| 0 | Name: RSA |
| | Identifiers: rsaEncryption |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.1.1 |
| | Parameters: NULL |
| | DER: 30 0d 06 09 2a 86 48 86 f7 0d 01 01 01 05 00 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: Compressed subjectPublicKey |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with secp256r1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = secp256r1 (1.2.840.10045.3.1.7) |
| | DER: 30 13 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 08 2A 86 |
| | 48 CE 3D 03 01 07 |
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
| | Also known as P-256, ansip256r1, prime256v1 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with secp384r1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = secp384r1 (1.3.132.0.34) |
| | DER: 30 10 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 05 2B 81 |
| | 04 00 22 |
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
| | Also known as P-384, ansip384r1 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with secp521r1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = secp521r1 (1.3.132.0.35) |
| | DER: 30 10 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 05 2B 81 |
| | 04 00 23 |
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
| | Also known as P-521, ansip521r1 |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | Name: X25519 (Montgomery) |
| | Identifiers: id-X25519 |
| | OID: 1.3.101.110 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 05 06 03 2B 65 6E |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 9 | Name: X448 (Montgomery) |
| | Identifiers: id-X448 |
| | OID: 1.3.101.111 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 05 06 03 2B 65 6F |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 10 | Name: Ed25519 (Twisted Edwards) |
| | Identifiers: id-Ed25519, id-EdDSA25519 |
| | OID: 1.3.101.112 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 05 06 03 2B 65 70 |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 11 | Name: Ed448 (Edwards) |
| | Identifiers: id-Ed448, id-EdDSA448 |
| | OID: 1.3.101.113 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 05 06 03 2B 65 71 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 16 | Name: HSS / LMS |
| | Identifiers: id-alg-hss-lms-hashsig, id-alg-mts-hashsig |
| | OID: 1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.3.17 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0D 06 0B 2A 86 48 86 F7 0D 01 09 10 03 11 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 17 | Name: XMSS |
| | Identifiers: id_alg_xmss |
| | OID: 0.4.0.127.0.15.1.1.13.0 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 04 00 7F 00 0F 01 01 0D 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 18 | Name: XMSS^MT |
| | Identifiers: id_alg_xmssmt |
| | OID: 0.4.0.127.0.15.1.1.14.0 |
| | Parameters: Absent |
| | DER: 30 0B 06 09 04 00 7F 00 0F 01 01 0E 00 |
| | Comments: |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 24 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with |
| | brainpoolP256r1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = brainpoolP256r1 |
| | (1.3.36.3.3.2.8.1.1.7) |
| | DER: 30 13 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 09 2B 24 |
| | 03 03 02 08 01 01 07 |
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 25 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with |
| | brainpoolP384r1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = brainpoolP384r1 |
| | (1.3.36.3.3.2.8.1.1.11) |
| | DER: 30 13 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 09 2B 24 |
| | 03 03 02 08 01 01 0B |
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 26 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with |
| | brainpoolP512r1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = brainpoolP512r1 |
| | (1.3.36.3.3.2.8.1.1.13) |
| | DER: 30 13 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 09 2B 24 |
| | 03 03 02 08 01 01 0D |
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 27 | Name: EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with |
| | FRP256v1 |
| | Identifiers: ecPublicKey, id-ecPublicKey |
| | OID: 1.2.840.10045.2.1 |
| | Parameters: namedCurve = FRP256v1 |
| | (1.2.250.1.223.101.256.1) |
| | DER: 30 13 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 0A 2A 81 |
| | 7A 01 81 5F 65 82 00 01 |
| | Comments: Point compressed subjectPublicKey |
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 15: C509 Public Key Algorithms
11.11. COSE Header Parameters Registry
EDITORS NOTE: The text should be moved a section and not be in the
IANA Section.
This document registers the following entries in the "COSE Header
Parameters" registry under the "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption
(COSE)" heading. The formatting and processing for c5b, c5c, and
c5t, and c5u are similar to x5bag, x5chain, x5t, x5u defined in
[I-D.ietf-cose-x509] except that the certificates are C509 instead of
DER encoded X.509 and uses a COSE_C509 structure instead of
COSE_X509. c5u provides an alternative way to identify an untrusted
certificate bag/chain by reference with a URI. The content is a
COSE_C509 item served with the application/cbor content format. The
COSE_C509 structure used in c5b, c5c, and c5u is defined as:
COSE_C509 = C509Certificate / [ 2* C509Certificate ]
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
As the contents of c5bag, c5chain, c5t, and c5u are untrusted input,
the header parameters can be in either the protected or unprotected
header bucket. The trust mechanism MUST process any certificates in
the c5b, c5c, and c5u parameters as untrusted input. The presence of
a self-signed certificate in the parameter MUST NOT cause the update
of the set of trust anchors without some out-of-band confirmation.
Note that certificates can also be identified with a 'kid' header
parameter by storing 'kid' and the associated bag or chain in a
dictionary.
+-----------+-------+----------------+------------------------------+
| Name | Label | Value Type | Description |
+===========+=======+================+==============================+
| c5b | TBD1 | COSE_C509 | An unordered bag of C509 |
| | | | certificates |
+-----------+-------+----------------+------------------------------+
| c5c | TBD2 | COSE_C509 | An ordered chain of C509 |
| | | | certificates |
+-----------+-------+----------------+------------------------------+
| c5t | TBD3 | COSE_CertHash | Hash of a C509Certificate |
+-----------+-------+----------------+------------------------------+
| c5u | TBD4 | uri | URI pointing to a COSE_C509 |
| | | | containing a ordered chain |
| | | | of certificates |
+-----------+-------+----------------+------------------------------+
11.12. TLS Certificate Types Registry
This document registers the following entry in the "TLS Certificate
Types" registry under the "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions"
heading. The new certificate type can be used with additional TLS
certificate compression [RFC8879]. C509 is defined in the same way
as as X509, but uses a different value and instead of DER-encoded
X.509 certificate, opaque cert_data<1..2^24-1> contains a the CBOR
sequence ~C509Certificate (an unwrapped C509Certificate).
EDITOR'S NOTE: The TLS registrations should be discussed and approved
by the TLS WG at a later stage. When COSE WG has adopted work on
C509 certificates, it could perhaps be presented in the TLS WG. The
TLS WG might e.g. want a separate draft in the TLS WG.
+-------+------------------+-------------+--------------------------+
| Value | Name | Recommended | Comment |
+=======+==================+=============+==========================+
| TBD5 | C509 Certificate | Y | |
+-------+------------------+-------------+--------------------------+
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
11.13. CBOR Tags Registry
This document registers the following entries in the "CBOR Tags"
registry under the "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Tags"
heading.
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Tag | X.509 Public Key Algorithms |
+======+============================================================+
| TDB6 | Data Item: COSE_C509 |
| | Semantics: An ordered chain of C509 certificates |
| | Reference: This document |
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-cose-x509]
Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE):
Header parameters for carrying and referencing X.509
certificates", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-cose-x509-08, 14 December 2020,
<https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-cose-
x509-08.txt>.
[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>.
[RFC2986] Nystrom, M. and B. Kaliski, "PKCS #10: Certification
Request Syntax Specification Version 1.7", RFC 2986,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2986, November 2000,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2986>.
[RFC4108] Housley, R., "Using Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) to
Protect Firmware Packages", RFC 4108,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4108, August 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4108>.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
[RFC8152] Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)",
RFC 8152, DOI 10.17487/RFC8152, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8152>.
[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>.
[RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data
Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to
Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and
JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610,
June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>.
[RFC8742] Bormann, C., "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
Sequences", RFC 8742, DOI 10.17487/RFC8742, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8742>.
[RFC8949] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR)", STD 94, RFC 8949,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8949, December 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8949>.
[RFC9090] Bormann, C., "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
Tags for Object Identifiers", RFC 9090,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9090, July 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9090>.
[SECG] "Elliptic Curve Cryptography, Standards for Efficient
Cryptography Group, ver. 2", 2009,
<https://secg.org/sec1-v2.pdf>.
12.2. Informative References
[CAB-Code] CA/Browser Forum, ., "CA/Browser Forum, "Baseline
Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-
Trusted Code Signing Certificates Version 2.3"", May 2021,
<https://cabforum.org/baseline-requirements-code-
signing/>.
[CAB-TLS] CA/Browser Forum, ., "CA/Browser Forum, "Baseline
Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-
Trusted Certificates Version 1.7.6"", June 2021,
<https://cabforum.org/baseline-requirements-documents/>.
[CborMe] Bormann, C., "CBOR Playground", May 2018,
<http://cbor.me/>.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
[GSMA-eUICC]
GSMA, ., "GSMA eUICC PKI Certificate Policy Version 2.1",
February 2021, <https://www.gsma.com/esim/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/SGP.14-v2.1.pdf>.
[I-D.ietf-lake-edhoc]
Selander, G., Mattsson, J. P., and F. Palombini,
"Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman Over COSE (EDHOC)", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-14, 18 May
2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lake-
edhoc-14.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-tls-ctls]
Rescorla, E., Barnes, R., Tschofenig, H., and B. M.
Schwartz, "Compact TLS 1.3", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-ietf-tls-ctls-06, 9 July 2022,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tls-ctls-
06.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-uta-tls13-iot-profile]
Tschofenig, H. and T. Fossati, "TLS/DTLS 1.3 Profiles for
the Internet of Things", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-ietf-uta-tls13-iot-profile-05, 6 July 2022,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-uta-tls13-iot-
profile-05.txt>.
[IEEE-802.1AR]
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, .,
"IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks–Secure Device Identity", IEEE Standard
802.1AR-2018 , August 2018,
<https://standards.ieee.org/standard/802_1AR-2018.html>.
[RFC6487] Huston, G., Michaelson, G., and R. Loomans, "A Profile for
X.509 PKIX Resource Certificates", RFC 6487,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6487, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6487>.
[RFC7228] Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7228, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7228>.
[RFC7925] Tschofenig, H., Ed. and T. Fossati, "Transport Layer
Security (TLS) / Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)
Profiles for the Internet of Things", RFC 7925,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7925, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7925>.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
[RFC7932] Alakuijala, J. and Z. Szabadka, "Brotli Compressed Data
Format", RFC 7932, DOI 10.17487/RFC7932, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7932>.
[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>.
[RFC8603] Jenkins, M. and L. Zieglar, "Commercial National Security
Algorithm (CNSA) Suite Certificate and Certificate
Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 8603,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8603, May 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8603>.
[RFC8879] Ghedini, A. and V. Vasiliev, "TLS Certificate
Compression", RFC 8879, DOI 10.17487/RFC8879, December
2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8879>.
[RFC9000] Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based
Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9000, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9000>.
[RFC9147] Rescorla, E., Tschofenig, H., and N. Modadugu, "The
Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version
1.3", RFC 9147, DOI 10.17487/RFC9147, April 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9147>.
[RFC9190] Preuß Mattsson, J. and M. Sethi, "EAP-TLS 1.3: Using the
Extensible Authentication Protocol with TLS 1.3",
RFC 9190, DOI 10.17487/RFC9190, February 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9190>.
[RFC9191] Sethi, M., Preuß Mattsson, J., and S. Turner, "Handling
Large Certificates and Long Certificate Chains in TLS-
Based EAP Methods", RFC 9191, DOI 10.17487/RFC9191,
February 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9191>.
[X.509-IoT]
Forsby, F., Furuhed, M., Papadimitratos, P., and S. Raza,
"Lightweight X.509 Digital Certificates for the Internet
of Things.", Springer, Cham. Lecture Notes of the
Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and
Telecommunications Engineering, vol 242., July 2018,
<https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93797-7_14>.
Appendix A. Example C509 Certificates
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
A.1. Example RFC 7925 profiled X.509 Certificate
Example of [RFC7925] profiled X.509 certificate parsed with OpenSSL.
Certificate:
Data:
Version: 3 (0x2)
Serial Number: 128269 (0x1f50d)
Signature Algorithm: ecdsa-with-SHA256
Issuer: CN=RFC test CA
Validity
Not Before: Jan 1 00:00:00 2020 GMT
Not After : Feb 2 00:00:00 2021 GMT
Subject: CN=01-23-45-FF-FE-67-89-AB
Subject Public Key Info:
Public Key Algorithm: id-ecPublicKey
Public-Key: (256 bit)
pub:
04:b1:21:6a:b9:6e:5b:3b:33:40:f5:bd:f0:2e:69:
3f:16:21:3a:04:52:5e:d4:44:50:b1:01:9c:2d:fd:
38:38:ab:ac:4e:14:d8:6c:09:83:ed:5e:9e:ef:24:
48:c6:86:1c:c4:06:54:71:77:e6:02:60:30:d0:51:
f7:79:2a:c2:06
ASN1 OID: prime256v1
NIST CURVE: P-256
X509v3 extensions:
X509v3 Key Usage:
Digital Signature
Signature Algorithm: ecdsa-with-SHA256
30:44:02:20:44:5d:79:8c:90:e7:f5:00:dc:74:7a:65:4c:ec:
6c:fa:6f:03:72:76:e1:4e:52:ed:07:fc:16:29:4c:84:66:0d:
02:20:5a:33:98:5d:fb:d4:bf:dd:6d:4a:cf:38:04:c3:d4:6e:
bf:3b:7f:a6:26:40:67:4f:c0:35:4f:a0:56:db:ae:a6
The DER encoding of the above certificate is 314 bytes.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
30 82 01 36 30 81 DE A0 03 02 01 02 02 03 01 F5 0D 30 0A 06 08 2A 86
48 CE 3D 04 03 02 30 16 31 14 30 12 06 03 55 04 03 0C 0B 52 46 43 20
74 65 73 74 20 43 41 30 1E 17 0D 32 30 30 31 30 31 30 30 30 30 30 30
5A 17 0D 32 31 30 32 30 32 30 30 30 30 30 30 5A 30 22 31 20 30 1E 06
03 55 04 03 0C 17 30 31 2D 32 33 2D 34 35 2D 46 46 2D 46 45 2D 36 37
2D 38 39 2D 41 42 30 59 30 13 06 07 2A 86 48 CE 3D 02 01 06 08 2A 86
48 CE 3D 03 01 07 03 42 00 04 B1 21 6A B9 6E 5B 3B 33 40 F5 BD F0 2E
69 3F 16 21 3A 04 52 5E D4 44 50 B1 01 9C 2D FD 38 38 AB AC 4E 14 D8
6C 09 83 ED 5E 9E EF 24 48 C6 86 1C C4 06 54 71 77 E6 02 60 30 D0 51
F7 79 2A C2 06 A3 0F 30 0D 30 0B 06 03 55 1D 0F 04 04 03 02 07 80 30
0A 06 08 2A 86 48 CE 3D 04 03 02 03 47 00 30 44 02 20 44 5D 79 8C 90
E7 F5 00 DC 74 7A 65 4C EC 6C FA 6F 03 72 76 E1 4E 52 ED 07 FC 16 29
4C 84 66 0D 02 20 5A 33 98 5D FB D4 BF DD 6D 4A CF 38 04 C3 D4 6E BF
3B 7F A6 26 40 67 4F C0 35 4F A0 56 DB AE A6
A.1.1. Example C509 Certificate Encoding
The CBOR encoding (~C509Certificate) of the same X.509 certificate is
shown below in CBOR diagnostic format.
/This defines a CBOR Sequence (RFC 8742):/
1,
h'01f50d',
"RFC test CA",
1577836800,
1612224000,
h'0123456789AB',
1,
h'02B1216AB96E5B3B3340F5BDF02E693F16213A04525ED44450
B1019C2DFD3838AB',
1,
0,
h'445D798C90E7F500DC747A654CEC6CFA6F037276E14E52ED07
FC16294C84660D5A33985DFBD4BFDD6D4ACF3804C3D46EBF3B
7FA62640674FC0354FA056DBAEA6'
The size of the CBOR encoding (CBOR sequence) is 138 bytes.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
01
43 01 F5 0D
6B 52 46 43 20 74 65 73 74 20 43 41
1A 5E 0B E1 00
1A 60 18 96 00
46 01 23 45 67 89 AB
01
58 21 02 B1 21 6A B9 6E 5B 3B 33 40 F5 BD F0 2E 69 3F 16 21 3A 04 52
5E D4 44 50 B1 01 9C 2D FD 38 38 AB
01
00
58 40 44 5D 79 8C 90 E7 F5 00 DC 74 7A 65 4C EC 6C FA 6F 03 72 76 E1
4E 52 ED 07 FC 16 29 4C 84 66 0D 5A 33 98 5D FB D4 BF DD 6D 4A CF 38
04 C3 D4 6E BF 3B 7F A6 26 40 67 4F C0 35 4F A0 56 DB AE A6
A.1.2. Example: Natively Signed C509 Certificate
The corresponding natively signed C509 certificate in CBOR diagnostic
format is identical, except for c509CertificateType and
signatureValue.
/This defines a CBOR Sequence (RFC 8742):/
0,
h'01f50d',
"RFC test CA",
1577836800,
1612224000,
h'0123456789AB',
1,
h'02B1216AB96E5B3B3340F5BDF02E693F16213A04525ED44450
B1019C2DFD3838AB',
1,
0,
h'B27A0B781455F71B68290F6C2EC9A897F18FDE9B6C59575953
BC67268AB0E4DDE99D273E04E4715383AB2257C6AAA35284E5
ED18BDB91247E9F2C433136480B9'
The size of the CBOR encoding (CBOR sequence) is 138 bytes.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
00
43 01 F5 0D
6B 52 46 43 20 74 65 73 74 20 43 41
1A 5E 0B E1 00
1A 60 18 96 00
46 01 23 45 67 89 AB
01
58 21 02 B1 21 6A B9 6E 5B 3B 33 40 F5 BD F0 2E 69 3F 16 21 3A 04 52
5E D4 44 50 B1 01 9C 2D FD 38 38 AB
01
00
58 40 B2 7A 0B 78 14 55 F7 1B 68 29 0F 6C 2E C9 A8 97 F1 8F DE 9B 6C
59 57 59 53 BC 67 26 8A B0 E4 DD E9 9D 27 3E 04 E4 71 53 83 AB 22 57
C6 AA A3 52 84 E5 ED 18 BD B9 12 47 E9 F2 C4 33 13 64 80 B9
A.1.3. Example: Additonal Keys for the Example Certificates
Below are the issuer key pair and the subject private key belonging
to the above example certificates. The private keys are encoded as
in COSE [RFC8152]. These issuer key pair can be used to sign or
verify the example certificates and the subject private key allows
the example certificates to be used in test vectors for other
protocols like EDHOC.
issuerPublicKeyAlgorithm :
1 (EC Public Key (Weierstraß) with secp256r1)
issuerPublicKey :
h'02AE4CDB01F614DEFC7121285FDC7F5C6D1D42C95647F061BA0080DF678867845E'
issuerPrivateKey :
h'DC66B3415456D649429B53223DF7532B942D6B0E0842C30BCA4C0ACF91547BB2'
subjectPrivateKey :
h'D718111F3F9BD91B92FF6877F386BDBFCEA7154268FD7F2FB56EE17D99EA16D4'
A.2. Example IEEE 802.1AR profiled X.509 Certificate
EDITOR'S NOTE: To do
A.3. Example CAB Baseline ECDSA HTTPS X.509 Certificate
The www.ietf.org HTTPS server replies with a certificate message with
2 certificates. The DER encoding of the first certificate is 1209
bytes.
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
30 82 04 b5 30 82 04 5a a0 03 02 01 02 02 10 04 7f a1 e3 19 28 ee 40
3b a0 b8 3a 39 56 73 fc 30 0a 06 08 2a 86 48 ce 3d 04 03 02 30 4a 31
0b 30 09 06 03 55 04 06 13 02 55 53 31 19 30 17 06 03 55 04 0a 13 10
43 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72 65 2c 20 49 6e 63 2e 31 20 30 1e 06 03 55
04 03 13 17 43 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72 65 20 49 6e 63 20 45 43 43 20
43 41 2d 33 30 1e 17 0d 32 30 30 37 32 39 30 30 30 30 30 30 5a 17 0d
32 31 30 37 32 39 31 32 30 30 30 30 5a 30 6d 31 0b 30 09 06 03 55 04
06 13 02 55 53 31 0b 30 09 06 03 55 04 08 13 02 43 41 31 16 30 14 06
03 55 04 07 13 0d 53 61 6e 20 46 72 61 6e 63 69 73 63 6f 31 19 30 17
06 03 55 04 0a 13 10 43 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72 65 2c 20 49 6e 63 2e
31 1e 30 1c 06 03 55 04 03 13 15 73 6e 69 2e 63 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61
72 65 73 73 6c 2e 63 6f 6d 30 59 30 13 06 07 2a 86 48 ce 3d 02 01 06
08 2a 86 48 ce 3d 03 01 07 03 42 00 04 96 3e cd d8 4d cd 1b 93 a1 cf
43 2d 1a 72 17 d6 c6 3b de 33 55 a0 2f 8c fb 5a d8 99 4c d4 4e 20 5f
15 f6 e3 d2 3b 38 2b a6 49 9b b1 7f 34 1f a5 92 fa 21 86 1f 16 d3 12
06 63 24 05 fd 70 42 bd a3 82 02 fd 30 82 02 f9 30 1f 06 03 55 1d 23
04 18 30 16 80 14 a5 ce 37 ea eb b0 75 0e 94 67 88 b4 45 fa d9 24 10
87 96 1f 30 1d 06 03 55 1d 0e 04 16 04 14 cc 0b 50 e7 d8 37 db f2 43
f3 85 3d 48 60 f5 3b 39 be 9b 2a 30 2e 06 03 55 1d 11 04 27 30 25 82
15 73 6e 69 2e 63 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72 65 73 73 6c 2e 63 6f 6d 82
0c 77 77 77 2e 69 65 74 66 2e 6f 72 67 30 0e 06 03 55 1d 0f 01 01 ff
04 04 03 02 07 80 30 1d 06 03 55 1d 25 04 16 30 14 06 08 2b 06 01 05
05 07 03 01 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 03 02 30 7b 06 03 55 1d 1f 04 74
30 72 30 37 a0 35 a0 33 86 31 68 74 74 70 3a 2f 2f 63 72 6c 33 2e 64
69 67 69 63 65 72 74 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 43 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72 65 49
6e 63 45 43 43 43 41 2d 33 2e 63 72 6c 30 37 a0 35 a0 33 86 31 68 74
74 70 3a 2f 2f 63 72 6c 34 2e 64 69 67 69 63 65 72 74 2e 63 6f 6d 2f
43 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72 65 49 6e 63 45 43 43 43 41 2d 33 2e 63 72
6c 30 4c 06 03 55 1d 20 04 45 30 43 30 37 06 09 60 86 48 01 86 fd 6c
01 01 30 2a 30 28 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 02 01 16 1c 68 74 74 70 73
3a 2f 2f 77 77 77 2e 64 69 67 69 63 65 72 74 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 43 50 53
30 08 06 06 67 81 0c 01 02 02 30 76 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 01 01 04
6a 30 68 30 24 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 30 01 86 18 68 74 74 70 3a 2f
2f 6f 63 73 70 2e 64 69 67 69 63 65 72 74 2e 63 6f 6d 30 40 06 08 2b
06 01 05 05 07 30 02 86 34 68 74 74 70 3a 2f 2f 63 61 63 65 72 74 73
2e 64 69 67 69 63 65 72 74 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 43 6c 6f 75 64 66 6c 61 72
65 49 6e 63 45 43 43 43 41 2d 33 2e 63 72 74 30 0c 06 03 55 1d 13 01
01 ff 04 02 30 00 30 82 01 05 06 0a 2b 06 01 04 01 d6 79 02 04 02 04
81 f6 04 81 f3 00 f1 00 76 00 f6 5c 94 2f d1 77 30 22 14 54 18 08 30
94 56 8e e3 4d 13 19 33 bf df 0c 2f 20 0b cc 4e f1 64 e3 00 00 01 73
9c 83 5f 8e 00 00 04 03 00 47 30 45 02 21 00 f8 d1 b4 a9 3d 2f 0d 4c
41 76 df b4 88 bc c7 3b 86 44 3d 7d e0 0e 6a c8 17 4d 89 48 a8 84 36
68 02 20 29 ff 5a 34 06 8a 24 0c 69 50 27 88 e8 ee 25 ab 7e d2 cb cf
68 6e ce 7b 5f 96 b4 31 a9 07 02 fa 00 77 00 5c dc 43 92 fe e6 ab 45
44 b1 5e 9a d4 56 e6 10 37 fb d5 fa 47 dc a1 73 94 b2 5e e6 f6 c7 0e
ca 00 00 01 73 9c 83 5f be 00 00 04 03 00 48 30 46 02 21 00 e8 91 c1
97 bf b0 e3 d3 0c b6 ce e6 0d 94 c3 c7 5f d1 17 53 36 93 11 08 d8 98
12 d4 d2 9d 81 d0 02 21 00 a1 59 d1 6c 46 47 d1 48 37 57 fc d6 ce 4e
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
75 ec 7b 5e f6 57 ef e0 28 f8 e5 cc 47 92 68 2d ac 43 30 0a 06 08 2a
86 48 ce 3d 04 03 02 03 49 00 30 46 02 21 00 bd 63 cf 4f 7e 5c fe 6c
29 38 5e a7 1c fb fc 1e 3f 7b 1c d0 72 51 a2 21 f7 77 69 c0 f4 71 df
ea 02 21 00 b5 c0 6c c4 58 54 fa 30 b2 82 88 b1 d3 bb 9a 66 61 ed 50
31 72 5b 1a 82 02 e0 da 5b 59 f9 54 02
A.3.1. Example C509 Certificate Encoding
The CBOR encoding (~C509Certificate) of the first X.509 certificate
is shown below in CBOR diagnostic format.
/This defines a CBOR Sequence (RFC 8742):/
1,
h'047FA1E31928EE403BA0B83A395673FC',
[
-4, "US",
-8, "Cloudflare, Inc.",
-1, "Cloudflare Inc ECC CA-3"
],
1595980800,
1627560000,
[
-4, "US",
-6, "CA",
-5, "San Francisco",
-8, "Cloudflare, Inc.",
-1, "sni.cloudflaressl.com"
],
1,
h'03963ECDD84DCD1B93A1CF432D1A7217D6C63BDE3355A02F8CFB5AD8994CD44E20',
[
7, h'A5CE37EAEBB0750E946788B445FAD9241087961F',
1, h'CC0B50E7D837DBF243F3853D4860F53B39BE9B2A',
3, [2, "sni.cloudflaressl.com", 2, "www.ietf.org"],
-2, 1,
8, [1, 2],
5, ["http://crl3.digicert.com/CloudflareIncECCCA-3.crl",
"http://crl4.digicert.com/CloudflareIncECCCA-3.crl"],
6, [h'6086480186FD6C0101', [1, "https://www.digicert.com/CPS"], 2],
9, [1, "http://ocsp.digicert.com",
2, "http://cacerts.digicert.com/CloudflareIncECCCA-3.crt"],
-4, -2,
10, [
h'F65C942FD1773022145418083094568EE34D131933BFDF0C2F200BCC4EF164E3',
77922190,
0,
h'F8D1B4A93D2F0D4C4176DFB488BCC73B86443D7DE00E6AC8174D8948A8843668
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
29FF5A34068A240C69502788E8EE25AB7ED2CBCF686ECE7B5F96B431A90702FA',
h'5CDC4392FEE6AB4544B15E9AD456E61037FBD5FA47DCA17394B25EE6F6C70ECA',
77922238,
0,
h'E891C197BFB0E3D30CB6CEE60D94C3C75FD1175336931108D89812D4D29D81D0
A159D16C4647D1483757FCD6CE4E75EC7B5EF657EFE028F8E5CC4792682DAC43'
]
],
0,
h'BD63CF4F7E5CFE6C29385EA71CFBFC1E3F7B1CD07251A221F77769C0F471DFEA
B5C06CC45854FA30B28288B1D3BB9A6661ED5031725B1A8202E0DA5B59F95402'
The size of the CBOR encoding (CBOR sequence) is 783 bytes.
A.4. Example CAB Baseline RSA HTTPS X.509 Certificate
The tools.ietf.org HTTPS server replies with a certificate message
with 4 certificates. The DER encoding of the first certificate is
1647 bytes.
30 82 06 6b 30 82 05 53 a0 03 02 01 02 02 09 00 a6 a5 5c 87 0e 39 b4
0e 30 0d 06 09 2a 86 48 86 f7 0d 01 01 0b 05 00 30 81 c6 31 0b 30 09
06 03 55 04 06 13 02 55 53 31 10 30 0e 06 03 55 04 08 13 07 41 72 69
7a 6f 6e 61 31 13 30 11 06 03 55 04 07 13 0a 53 63 6f 74 74 73 64 61
6c 65 31 25 30 23 06 03 55 04 0a 13 1c 53 74 61 72 66 69 65 6c 64 20
54 65 63 68 6e 6f 6c 6f 67 69 65 73 2c 20 49 6e 63 2e 31 33 30 31 06
03 55 04 0b 13 2a 68 74 74 70 3a 2f 2f 63 65 72 74 73 2e 73 74 61 72
66 69 65 6c 64 74 65 63 68 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 72 65 70 6f 73 69 74 6f 72
79 2f 31 34 30 32 06 03 55 04 03 13 2b 53 74 61 72 66 69 65 6c 64 20
53 65 63 75 72 65 20 43 65 72 74 69 66 69 63 61 74 65 20 41 75 74 68
6f 72 69 74 79 20 2d 20 47 32 30 1e 17 0d 32 30 31 30 30 31 31 39 33
38 33 36 5a 17 0d 32 31 31 31 30 32 31 39 33 38 33 36 5a 30 3e 31 21
30 1f 06 03 55 04 0b 13 18 44 6f 6d 61 69 6e 20 43 6f 6e 74 72 6f 6c
20 56 61 6c 69 64 61 74 65 64 31 19 30 17 06 03 55 04 03 0c 10 2a 2e
74 6f 6f 6c 73 2e 69 65 74 66 2e 6f 72 67 30 82 01 22 30 0d 06 09 2a
86 48 86 f7 0d 01 01 01 05 00 03 82 01 0f 00 30 82 01 0a 02 82 01 01
00 b1 e1 37 e8 eb 82 d6 89 fa db f5 c2 4b 77 f0 2c 4a de 72 6e 3e 13
60 d1 a8 66 1e c4 ad 3d 32 60 e5 f0 99 b5 f4 7a 7a 48 55 21 ee 0e 39
12 f9 ce 0d ca f5 69 61 c7 04 ed 6e 0f 1d 3b 1e 50 88 79 3a 0e 31 41
16 f1 b1 02 64 68 a5 cd f5 4a 0a ca 99 96 35 08 c3 7e 27 5d d0 a9 cf
f3 e7 28 af 37 d8 b6 7b dd f3 7e ae 6e 97 7f f7 ca 69 4e cc d0 06 df
5d 27 9b 3b 12 e7 e6 fe 08 6b 52 7b 82 11 7c 72 b3 46 eb c1 e8 78 b8
0f cb e1 eb bd 06 44 58 dc 83 50 b2 a0 62 5b dc 81 b8 36 e3 9e 7c 79
b2 a9 53 8a e0 0b c9 4a 2a 13 39 31 13 bd 2c cf a8 70 cf 8c 8d 3d 01
a3 88 ae 12 00 36 1d 1e 24 2b dd 79 d8 53 01 26 ed 28 4f c9 86 94 83
4e c8 e1 14 2e 85 b3 af d4 6e dd 69 46 af 41 25 0e 7a ad 8b f2 92 ca
79 d9 7b 32 4f f7 77 e8 f9 b4 4f 23 5c d4 5c 03 ae d8 ab 3a ca 13 5f
5d 5d 5d a1 02 03 01 00 01 a3 82 02 e1 30 82 02 dd 30 0c 06 03 55 1d
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
13 01 01 ff 04 02 30 00 30 1d 06 03 55 1d 25 04 16 30 14 06 08 2b 06
01 05 05 07 03 01 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 03 02 30 0e 06 03 55 1d 0f
01 01 ff 04 04 03 02 05 a0 30 3d 06 03 55 1d 1f 04 36 30 34 30 32 a0
30 a0 2e 86 2c 68 74 74 70 3a 2f 2f 63 72 6c 2e 73 74 61 72 66 69 65
6c 64 74 65 63 68 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 73 66 69 67 32 73 31 2d 32 34 32 2e
63 72 6c 30 63 06 03 55 1d 20 04 5c 30 5a 30 4e 06 0b 60 86 48 01 86
fd 6e 01 07 17 01 30 3f 30 3d 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 02 01 16 31 68
74 74 70 3a 2f 2f 63 65 72 74 69 66 69 63 61 74 65 73 2e 73 74 61 72
66 69 65 6c 64 74 65 63 68 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 72 65 70 6f 73 69 74 6f 72
79 2f 30 08 06 06 67 81 0c 01 02 01 30 81 82 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07
01 01 04 76 30 74 30 2a 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 30 01 86 1e 68 74 74
70 3a 2f 2f 6f 63 73 70 2e 73 74 61 72 66 69 65 6c 64 74 65 63 68 2e
63 6f 6d 2f 30 46 06 08 2b 06 01 05 05 07 30 02 86 3a 68 74 74 70 3a
2f 2f 63 65 72 74 69 66 69 63 61 74 65 73 2e 73 74 61 72 66 69 65 6c
64 74 65 63 68 2e 63 6f 6d 2f 72 65 70 6f 73 69 74 6f 72 79 2f 73 66
69 67 32 2e 63 72 74 30 1f 06 03 55 1d 23 04 18 30 16 80 14 25 45 81
68 50 26 38 3d 3b 2d 2c be cd 6a d9 b6 3d b3 66 63 30 2b 06 03 55 1d
11 04 24 30 22 82 10 2a 2e 74 6f 6f 6c 73 2e 69 65 74 66 2e 6f 72 67
82 0e 74 6f 6f 6c 73 2e 69 65 74 66 2e 6f 72 67 30 1d 06 03 55 1d 0e
04 16 04 14 ad 8a b4 1c 07 51 d7 92 89 07 b0 b7 84 62 2f 36 55 7a 5f
4d 30 82 01 06 06 0a 2b 06 01 04 01 d6 79 02 04 02 04 81 f7 04 81 f4
00 f2 00 77 00 f6 5c 94 2f d1 77 30 22 14 54 18 08 30 94 56 8e e3 4d
13 19 33 bf df 0c 2f 20 0b cc 4e f1 64 e3 00 00 01 74 e5 ac 71 13 00
00 04 03 00 48 30 46 02 21 00 8c f5 48 52 ce 56 35 43 39 11 cf 10 cd
b9 1f 52 b3 36 39 22 3a d1 38 a4 1d ec a6 fe de 1f e9 0f 02 21 00 bc
a2 25 43 66 c1 9a 26 91 c4 7a 00 b5 b6 53 ab bd 44 c2 f8 ba ae f4 d2
da f2 52 7c e6 45 49 95 00 77 00 5c dc 43 92 fe e6 ab 45 44 b1 5e 9a
d4 56 e6 10 37 fb d5 fa 47 dc a1 73 94 b2 5e e6 f6 c7 0e ca 00 00 01
74 e5 ac 72 3c 00 00 04 03 00 48 30 46 02 21 00 a5 e0 90 6e 63 e9 1d
4f dd ef ff 03 52 b9 1e 50 89 60 07 56 4b 44 8a 38 28 f5 96 dc 6b 28
72 6d 02 21 00 fc 91 ea ed 02 16 88 66 05 4e e1 8a 2e 53 46 c4 cc 51
fe b3 fa 10 a9 1d 2e db f9 91 25 f8 6c e6 30 0d 06 09 2a 86 48 86 f7
0d 01 01 0b 05 00 03 82 01 01 00 14 04 3f a0 be d2 ee 3f a8 6e 3a 1f
78 8e a0 4c 35 53 0f 11 06 1f ff 60 a1 6d 0b 83 e9 d9 2a db b3 3f 9d
b3 d7 e0 59 4c 19 a8 e4 19 a5 0c a7 70 72 77 63 d5 fe 64 51 0a d2 7a
d6 50 a5 8a 92 38 ec cb 2f 0f 5a c0 64 58 4d 5c 06 b9 73 63 68 27 8b
89 34 dc 79 c7 1d 3a fd 34 5f 83 14 41 58 49 80 68 29 80 39 8a 86 72
69 cc 79 37 ce e3 97 f7 dc f3 95 88 ed 81 03 29 00 d2 a2 c7 ba ab d6
3a 8e ca 09 0b d9 fb 39 26 4b ff 03 d8 8e 2d 3f 6b 21 ca 8a 7d d8 5f
fb 94 ba 83 de 9c fc 15 8d 61 fa 67 2d b0 c7 db 3d 25 0a 41 4a 85 d3
7f 49 46 37 3c f4 b1 75 d0 52 f3 dd c7 66 f1 4b fd aa 00 ed bf e4 7e
ed 01 ec 7b e4 f6 46 fc 31 fd 72 fe 03 d2 f2 65 af 4d 7e e2 81 9b 7a
fd 30 3c f5 52 f4 05 34 a0 8a 3e 19 41 58 c8 a8 e0 51 71 84 09 15 ae
ec a5 77 75 fa 18 f7 d5 77 d5 31 cc c7 2d
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
A.4.1. Example C509 Certificate Encoding
The CBOR encoding (~C509Certificate) of the first X.509 certificate
is shown below in CBOR diagnostic format.
/This defines a CBOR Sequence (RFC 8742):/
1,
h'A6A55C870E39B40E',
[
-4, "US",
-6, "Arizona",
-5, "Scottsdale",
-8, "Starfield Technologies, Inc.",
-9, "http://certs.starfieldtech.com/repository/",
-1, "Starfield Secure Certificate Authority - G2"
],
1601581116,
1635881916,
[
-9, "Domain Control Validated",
1, "*.tools.ietf.org"
],
0,
h'B1E137E8EB82D689FADBF5C24B77F02C4ADE726E3E1360D1A8661EC4AD3D3260
E5F099B5F47A7A485521EE0E3912F9CE0DCAF56961C704ED6E0F1D3B1E508879
3A0E314116F1B1026468A5CDF54A0ACA99963508C37E275DD0A9CFF3E728AF37
D8B67BDDF37EAE6E977FF7CA694ECCD006DF5D279B3B12E7E6FE086B527B8211
7C72B346EBC1E878B80FCBE1EBBD064458DC8350B2A0625BDC81B836E39E7C79
B2A9538AE00BC94A2A13393113BD2CCFA870CF8C8D3D01A388AE1200361D1E24
2BDD79D8530126ED284FC98694834EC8E1142E85B3AFD46EDD6946AF41250E7A
AD8BF292CA79D97B324FF777E8F9B44F235CD45C03AED8AB3ACA135F5D5D5DA1',
[
-4, -2,
8, [ 1, 2 ],
-2, 5,
5, ["http://crl.starfieldtech.com/sfig2s1-242.crl"],
6, [ h'6086480186fd6e01071701',
[1, "http://certificates.starfieldtech.com/repository/"], 1 ],
9, [ 1, "http://ocsp.starfieldtech.com/",
2, "http://certificates.starfieldtech.com/repository/sfig2.crt" ],
7, h'254581685026383D3B2D2CBECD6AD9B63DB36663',
3, [ 2, "*.tools.ietf.org", 2, "tools.ietf.org" ],
1, h'AD8AB41C0751D7928907B0B784622F36557A5F4D',
10, [
h'F65C942FD1773022145418083094568EE34D131933BFDF0C2F200BCC4EF164E3',
1715,
0,
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
h'8CF54852CE5635433911CF10CDB91F52B33639223AD138A41DECA6FEDE1FE90F
BCA2254366C19A2691C47A00B5B653ABBD44C2F8BAAEF4D2DAF2527CE6454995',
h'5CDC4392FEE6AB4544B15E9AD456E61037FBD5FA47DCA17394B25EE6F6C70ECA',
2012,
0,
h'A5E0906E63E91D4FDDEFFF0352B91E50896007564B448A3828F596DC6B28726D
FC91EAED02168866054EE18A2E5346C4CC51FEB3FA10A91D2EDBF99125F86CE6'
]
],
23,
h'14043FA0BED2EE3FA86E3A1F788EA04C35530F11061FFF60A16D0B83E9D92ADB
B33F9DB3D7E0594C19A8E419A50CA770727763D5FE64510AD27AD650A58A9238
ECCB2F0F5AC064584D5C06B9736368278B8934DC79C71D3AFD345F8314415849
80682980398A867269CC7937CEE397F7DCF39588ED81032900D2A2C7BAABD63A
8ECA090BD9FB39264BFF03D88E2D3F6B21CA8A7DD85FFB94BA83DE9CFC158D61
FA672DB0C7DB3D250A414A85D37F4946373CF4B175D052F3DDC766F14BFDAA00
EDBFE47EED01EC7BE4F646FC31FD72FE03D2F265AF4D7EE2819B7AFD303CF552
F40534A08A3E194158C8A8E05171840915AEECA57775FA18F7D577D531CCC72D'
The size of the CBOR encoding (CBOR sequence) is 1245 bytes.
Acknowledgments
The authors want to thank Henk Birkholz, Carsten Bormann, Russ
Housley, Olle Johansson, Benjamin Kaduk, Ilari Liusvaara, Laurence
Lundblade, Francesca Palombinini, Thomas Peterson, Michael
Richardson, Maik Reichert, Stefan Santesson, Jim Schaad, Fraser
Tweedale, and Rene Struik for reviewing and commenting on
intermediate versions of the draft and helping with GitHub.
Authors' Addresses
John Preuß Mattsson
Ericsson AB
Email: john.mattsson@ericsson.com
Göran Selander
Ericsson AB
Email: goran.selander@ericsson.com
Shahid Raza
RISE AB
Email: shahid.raza@ri.se
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft C509 Certificates July 2022
Joel Höglund
RISE AB
Email: joel.hoglund@ri.se
Martin Furuhed
Nexus Group
Email: martin.furuhed@nexusgroup.com
Preuß Mattsson, et al. Expires 11 January 2023 [Page 57]