Shepherd writeup
rfc8636-08

1. Summary

    This document specifies an updated Public Key Cryptography for Initial
    Authentication in Kerberos (PKINIT, rfc4556) which is not dependent on
    SHA-1.  In particular, it describes negotiation for Key Derivation
    Functions, and includes test vectors for these schemes.

    This is a Standards Track document since its core goal is to update
    PKINIT, which is a standard part of Kerberos implementations.
    Accordingly, it updates rfc4556 (PKINIT), which is Standards Track.

    Robbie Harwood is the document shepherd.  Benjamin Kaduk is the
    responsible Area Director.

2. Review and Consensus

    There is consensus for this document, which improves Kerberos's ability to
    handle compromise of cryptographic algorithms.  Having options other than
    SHA-1 for PKINIT is noncontroversial within the working groups; this
    document defines SHA-256, SHA-512, and SHA-384 as additional
    possibilities, and assigns additional Object Identifiers for them.

    This document has been around for quite a long time, originally part of
    krb-wg before being taken up by kitten in the re-charter.  Implementations
    have existed in both MIT krb5 and Heimdal since 2011 and 2008,
    respectively.  Most shaping review happened under krb-wg, but those
    contributors are also participants in kitten.

    During drafting, there were concerns that using an unknown well-known
    principal name together with PKINIT agility would cause an error code
    overlap, despite there being no known shipped implementations.
    Conservatively, the error code was reassigned.  We also spent time on
    thinking through our ASN.1, and making sure the appendix module was
    all-inclusive.

    This document received review and/or implementation from a significant
    number of working group contributors.  Two implementations (which can
    reproduce test vectors) have proved stable and manageable in production
    environments, and no unaddressed issues have been reported from any others
    that might exist.  In an ideal world it would have been published much
    sooner, but has been repeatedly deprioritized in favor of other work.

3. Intellectual property

    There are no intellectual property disclosures against this document, and
    all three authors (and editor) have confirmed compliance with BCPs 78
    and 79.  Since this document contains contributions from before 2008, it
    may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process.

4. Other information

    The IANA considerations are simple: rfc6113 previously created a registry
    with entries reserved for this document (hence the "missing reference"
    from idnits).  This document requests said entries be updated to point to
    this document.

    rfc6234 is cited normatively, which also flags idnits.  However, it is
    already present in the Downref Registry.
Back