CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header parameters for carrying and referencing X.509 certificates
draft-ietf-cose-x509-08
Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (cose WG) | |
---|---|---|---|
Author | Jim Schaad | ||
Last updated | 2021-01-21 (latest revision 2020-12-14) | ||
Replaces | draft-schaad-cose-x509 | ||
Stream | IETF | ||
Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
Formats | plain text html xml pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex | ||
Reviews | |||
Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
Document shepherd | Ivaylo Petrov | ||
Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2020-05-12) | ||
IESG | IESG state | Approved-announcement to be sent::Revised I-D Needed | |
Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
Telechat date | |||
Responsible AD | Barry Leiba | ||
Send notices to | Ivaylo Petrov <ivaylo@ackl.io> | ||
IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - Actions Needed |
Network Working Group J. Schaad Internet-Draft August Cellars Intended status: Standards Track 13 December 2020 Expires: 16 June 2021 CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Header parameters for carrying and referencing X.509 certificates draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 Abstract The CBOR Signing And Encrypted Message (COSE) structure uses references to keys in general. For some algorithms, additional properties are defined which carry parameters relating to keys as needed. The COSE Key structure is used for transporting keys outside of COSE messages. This document extends the way that keys can be identified and transported by providing attributes that refer to or contain X.509 certificates. Contributing to this document This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. The source for this draft is being maintained in GitHub. Suggested changes should be submitted as pull requests at https://github.com/ cose-wg/X509. Instructions are on that page as well. Editorial changes can be managed in GitHub, but any substantial issues need to be discussed on the COSE mailing list. 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 16 June 2021. Schaad Expires 16 June 2021 [Page 1] Internet-Draft COSE X.509 December 2020 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2020 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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. X.509 COSE Header Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. X.509 certificates and static-static ECDH . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1. COSE Header Parameter Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2. COSE Header Algorithm Parameter Registry . . . . . . . . 8 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1. Introduction In the process of writing [RFC8152], the working group discussed X.509 certificates [RFC5280] and decided that no use cases were presented that showed a need to support certificates. Since that time, a number of cases have been defined in which X.509 certificate support is necessary, and by implication, applications will need a documented and consistent way to handle such certificates. This document defines a set of attributes that will allow applications to transport and refer to X.509 certificates in a consistent manner. In some of these cases, a constrained device is being deployed in the context of an existing X.509 PKI: for example, in the 6TiSCH environment, [I-D.richardson-enrollment-roadmap] describes a device enrollment solution that relies on the presence of a factory- installed certificate on the device. The [I-D.ietf-lake-edhoc] draft was also written with the idea that long term certificates could be used to provide for authentication of devices, and uses them to establish session keys. Another possible scenario is the use of COSE Schaad Expires 16 June 2021 [Page 2] Internet-Draft COSE X.509 December 2020Show full document text