Redacted Fields in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Response
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-redacted-03
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 9537.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | James Gould , David Smith , Jody Kolker , Roger Carney | ||
| Last updated | 2022-03-03 | ||
| Replaces | draft-gould-regext-rdap-redacted | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Associated WG milestone |
|
||
| Document shepherd | Gustavo Lozano Ibarra | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9537 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | gustavo.lozano@icann.org |
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-redacted-03
Network Working Group J.G. Gould
Internet-Draft D.S. Smith
Intended status: Standards Track VeriSign, Inc.
Expires: 3 September 2022 J.K. Kolker
R.C. Carney
GoDaddy Inc.
2 March 2022
Redacted Fields in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Response
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-redacted-03
Abstract
This document describes an RDAP extension for explicitly identifying
redacted RDAP response fields, using JSONPath as the default
expression language.
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 3 September 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.
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Redaction Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Redaction by Removal Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Redaction by Empty Value Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Redacted RDAP Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. RDAP Conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. "redacted" Member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. JSONPath Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.1. RDAP Extensions Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2. JSON Values Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
10.1. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
10.2. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Appendix A. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
A.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
A.3. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
1. Introduction
This document describes an RDAP extension for explicitly identifying
redacted RDAP response fields, using JSONPath as the default
expression language. A redacted RDAP field is one that has data
removed from the RDAP response due to the lack of client privilege to
receive the field. This extension can be used to identify redacted
RDAP fields in any RDAP object class, as defined in [RFC9083], or
RDAP fields defined in RDAP extensions. Because an RDAP response may
exclude a field due to either the lack of data or based on the lack
of RDAP client privileges, this extension is used to explicitly
specify which RDAP fields are not included in the RDAP response due
to redaction. It thereby provides a capability for disambiguation
between redaction and possible other reasons for data or field
absence.
In [RFC9082] RDAP supports both lookup and search queries, where a
lookup query responds with a single object and a search query
responds with a list of objects. This document applies to redaction
of a single object of a lookup response and in each of the objects of
a search response.
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
JSONPath, as defined in [I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base], is used as the
default expression language to reference RDAP fields that have been
redacted. The redacted JSON fields will either be removed or have
empty values in the RDAP response. JSON is defined by [RFC8259].
2. Conventions Used in This Document
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.
The JSON examples include extra line breaks and whitespace. For
instance, the JSONPath expressions are broken out into multiple lines
when required for illustration.
3. Redaction Methods
Redaction in RDAP can be handled in multiple ways. The use of
placeholder text for the values of the RDAP fields, such as the
placeholder text "XXXX", MUST NOT be used for redaction. A
placeholder text value will not match the format requirements of each
of the RDAP fields and provides an inconsistent and unreliable
redaction signal. This section covers the redaction methods that can
be used with the redaction signaling defined in Section 4.2.
RDAP responses, as defined in [RFC9083], include a mix of JSON
objects and JSON arrays, where JSON arrays are heavily used for
entity objects with jCard [RFC7095]. jCard [RFC7095] is a JSON
representation of vCard [RFC6350] that inherits its dependency on
arrays. An example is the vCard [RFC6350] "ADR" property / jCard
[RFC7095] "adr" property that defines a sequence of address
components. According to [RFC6350], when an "ADR" property component
value is missing, the associated component separator MUST still be
specified. jCard [RFC7095] extends the use of arrays with each
individual vCard property being represented by an array of three
fixed elements, followed by one or more additional elements. The mix
of JSON objects and JSON arrays impacts the methods used for
redaction in RDAP.
The redaction of RDAP fields fall into the two categories of
Redaction by Removal Method (Section 3.1) and Redaction by Empty
Value Method (Section 3.2), defined in the following sub-sections.
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
3.1. Redaction by Removal Method
The Redaction by Removal Method is when the RDAP field is removed
from the RDAP response, which is the preferred method. The Redaction
by Removal Method can be done for all RDAP response fields other than
response fields using the position in an array to signal the redacted
field (e.g., the JSON arrays used with jCard [RFC7095]). RDAP
extensions such as JSContact in Registration Data Access Protocol
(RDAP) JSON Responses [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact] do not have a
dependency on the use of positional JSON arrays and are therefore
suited for the Redaction by Removal Method.
When an RDAP object is redacted by removal, all of the RDAP object's
child fields are also removed. Only the redacted RDAP object needs
to be referenced in the list of redacted fields, as defined in
Section 4.2. An example of redacting an RDAP object is removing the
administrative contact from the RDAP response and including the
following "redacted" member:
"redacted": [
{
"name": {
"type": "Administrative Contact"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='administrative')]",
"method": "removal"
}
]
Figure 1: Redacted Administrative Contact
The Redaction by Removal Method MUST NOT be used to remove a field
using the position in a fixed length array to signal the redacted
field. For example, removal of an individual data field in jCard
[RFC7095] will result in a non-conformant jCard [RFC7095] array
definition.
3.2. Redaction by Empty Value Method
The Redaction by Empty Value Method is when a redacted field is not
removed, but its value is set to an empty value, such as "" for a
jCard [RFC7095] Text ("text") property or null for non-Text ("text")
properties. The empty jCard [RFC7095] values ("" or null) are
referenced in the "redacted" member in place of the jCard [RFC7095]
property name, such as referencing the "fn" jCard property value at
position 3 instead of referencing the "fn" jCard property name at
position 0. The Redaction by Empty Value Method SHOULD be used only
when redacting JSON response fields that use the position in an array
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
to signal the redacted field (e.g., jCard [RFC7095] arrays).
Optional jCard [RFC7095] properties SHOULD use the Redaction by
Removal Method (Section 3.1) to redact the entire property. The
required jCard [RFC7095] "fn" property, defined in section 6.2.1 of
vCard [RFC6350], MUST use the Redaction by Empty Value Method to
redact the property value. Removing the "fn" property would violate
vCard [RFC6350] and removing the property value would violate the
fixed array positions defined in jCard [RFC7095].
An example of the redacted field "fn" jCard property using the
Redaction by Empty Value Method:
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
""
]
Figure 2: Redacted "fn" jCard Property using Redaction by Empty
Value Method
An example of the "redacted" member for the redacted "fn" jCard
property value, which is array position 3:
"redacted": [
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Name"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "emptyValue",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
}
]
Figure 3: Redacted Registrant Name using Array Position
4. Redacted RDAP Response
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
4.1. RDAP Conformance
RDAP responses that contain values described in this document MUST
indicate conformance with this specification by including an
rdapConformance ([RFC9083]) value of "redacted_0.1". The information
needed to register this value in the RDAP Extensions Registry is
described in Section 6.1.
Example rdapConformance member with the redacted extension:
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0",
"redacted_0.1"
]
Figure 4: rdapConformance with Redacted Extension
4.2. "redacted" Member
The "redacted" member MUST be added to the RDAP response when there
are redacted fields. The "redacted" member is included as a member
of the object class in a lookup response, such as the object classes
defined in [RFC9083], and as a member of the object instances in a
search response, such as the object instances defined in [RFC9083].
The "redacted" member contains an array of redacted objects with the
following child members:
"name": A logical name for the redacted field. The logical name
used for the redacted field is up to server policy. The logical
name is defined using an object with a "type" field denoting a
registered redacted name (see Section 6.2) or a "description"
field denoting an unregistered redacted name. The registered
redacted names and the chosen unregistered names can meet the
needs of different RDAP services or industries.
"path": The JSON expression of the redacted field, using the
expression language defined by the "pathLang" member. The JSON
expression references a removed JSON field or an empty field
value based on Section 3.
"pathLang": OPTIONAL JSON path expression language used, with the
default value of "jsonpath" for JSONPath
([I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base]). Other JSON path expression languages
MAY be used based on server policy.
"method": OPTIONAL redaction method used with "removal" indicating
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
the Redaction By Removed Method (Section 3.1) and "emptyValue"
indicating the Redaction by Empty Value Method (Section 3.2),
with the default value of "removal".
"reason": OPTIONAL human readable reason(s) for the redacted field
in the language defined by the [RFC9083] "lang" member. The
default language is "en" if the [RFC9083] "lang" member is not
specified. The reason is defined using an object with an
OPTIONAL "type" field denoting a registered redacted reason (see
see Section 6.2) and an OPTIONAL "description" field denoting an
unregistered redacted reason. The "description" field MUST NOT
be a client processing dependency.
Example unredacted version of an RDAP lookup response:
{
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0"
],
"objectClassName": "domain",
"handle": "ABC123",
"ldhName": "example.com",
"secureDNS": {
"delegationSigned": false
},
"notices": [
{
"title": "Terms of Use",
"description": [
"Service subject to Terms of Use."
],
"links": [
{
"rel": "self",
"href": "https://www.example.com/terms-of-use",
"type": "text/html",
"value": "https://www.example.com/terms-of-use"
}
]
}
],
"nameservers": [
{
"objectClassName": "nameserver",
"ldhName": "ns1.example.com"
},
{
"objectClassName": "nameserver",
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"ldhName": "ns2.example.com"
}
],
"entities": [
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "123",
"roles": [
"registrar"
],
"publicIds": [
{
"type": "IANA Registrar ID",
"identifier": "1"
}
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Example Registrar Inc."
],
[
"adr",
{},
"text",
[
"",
"Suite 100",
"123 Example Dr.",
"Dulles",
"VA",
"20166-6503",
"US"
]
],
[
"email",
{},
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"text",
"contact@organization.example"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1.7035555555;ext=1234"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "fax"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1.7035555556"
]
]
],
"entities": [
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"roles": [
"abuse"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Abuse Contact"
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"abuse@organization.example"
],
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1.7035555555;ext=1234"
]
]
]
}
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "XXXX",
"roles": [
"registrant"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Registrant User"
],
[
"org",
{},
"text",
"Example Inc."
],
[
"adr",
{},
"text",
[
"",
"Suite 1235",
"4321 Rue Somewhere",
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"Quebec",
"QC",
"G1V 2M2",
"Canada"
]
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"registrant.user@example.com"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1-555-555-1235;ext=123"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "fax"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1-555-555-5321"
]
]
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "YYYY",
"roles": [
"technical"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
{},
"text",
"Technical User"
],
[
"org",
{},
"text",
"Example Inc."
],
[
"adr",
{},
"text",
[
"",
"Suite 1234",
"4321 Rue Somewhere",
"Quebec",
"QC",
"G1V 2M2",
"Canada"
]
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"technical.user@example.com"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=321"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "fax"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1-555-555-4321"
]
]
]
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
},
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "ZZZZ",
"roles": [
"administrative"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Administrative User"
],
[
"org",
{},
"text",
"Example Inc."
],
[
"adr",
{},
"text",
[
"",
"Suite 1236",
"4321 Rue Somewhere",
"Quebec",
"QC",
"G1V 2M2",
"Canada"
]
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"administrative.user@example.com"
],
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1-555-555-1236;ext=789"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "fax"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1-555-555-6321"
]
]
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "WWWW",
"roles": [
"billing"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Billing User"
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"billing.user@example.com"
]
]
]
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
}
],
"events": [
{
"eventAction": "registration",
"eventDate": "1997-06-03T00:00:00Z"
},
{
"eventAction": "last changed",
"eventDate": "2020-05-28T01:35:00Z"
},
{
"eventAction": "expiration",
"eventDate": "2021-06-03T04:00:00Z"
}
],
"status": [
"server delete prohibited",
"server update prohibited",
"server transfer prohibited",
"client transfer prohibited"
]
}
Figure 5: Unredacted RDAP Lookup Response
Example redacted version of an RDAP lookup response:
{
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0",
"redacted_0"
],
"objectClassName": "domain",
"ldhName": "example.com",
"secureDNS": {
"delegationSigned": false
},
"notices": [
{
"title": "Terms of Use",
"description": [
"Service subject to Terms of Use."
],
"links": [
{
"rel": "self",
"href": "https://www.example.com/terms-of-use",
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"type": "text/html",
"value": "https://www.example.com/terms-of-use"
}
]
}
],
"nameservers": [
{
"objectClassName": "nameserver",
"ldhName": "ns1.example.com"
},
{
"objectClassName": "nameserver",
"ldhName": "ns2.example.com"
}
],
"entities": [
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "123",
"roles": [
"registrar"
],
"publicIds": [
{
"type": "IANA Registrar ID",
"identifier": "1"
}
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Example Registrar Inc."
],
[
"adr",
{},
"text",
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
[
"",
"Suite 100",
"123 Example Dr.",
"Dulles",
"VA",
"20166-6503",
"US"
]
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"contact@organization.example"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1.7035555555"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "fax"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1.7035555556"
]
]
],
"entities": [
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"roles": [
"abuse"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
"Abuse Contact"
],
[
"email",
{},
"text",
"abuse@organization.example"
],
[
"tel",
{
"type": "voice"
},
"uri",
"tel:+1.7035555555"
]
]
]
}
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "XXXX",
"roles": [
"registrant"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
""
],
[
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"adr",
{},
"text",
[
"",
"",
"",
"",
"QC",
"",
"Canada"
]
]
]
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "entity",
"handle": "YYYY",
"roles": [
"technical"
],
"vcardArray": [
"vcard",
[
[
"version",
{},
"text",
"4.0"
],
[
"fn",
{},
"text",
""
],
[
"org",
{},
"text",
"Example Inc."
],
[
"adr",
{},
"text",
[
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"",
"Suite 1234",
"4321 Rue Somewhere",
"Quebec",
"QC",
"G1V 2M2",
"Canada"
]
]
]
]
}
],
"events": [
{
"eventAction": "registration",
"eventDate": "1997-06-03T00:00:00Z"
},
{
"eventAction": "last changed",
"eventDate": "2020-05-28T01:35:00Z"
},
{
"eventAction": "expiration",
"eventDate": "2021-06-03T04:00:00Z"
}
],
"status": [
"server delete prohibited",
"server update prohibited",
"server transfer prohibited",
"client transfer prohibited"
],
"redacted": [
{
"name": {
"type": "Registry Domain ID"
},
"path": "$.handle",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Name"
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "emptyValue",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Organization"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='org')]",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Street"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='adr')][3][:3]",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "emptyValue",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant City"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='adr')][3][3]",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "emptyValue",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Postal Code"
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='adr')][3][5]",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "emptyValue",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Email"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='email')]",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Registrant Phone"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[1].type=='voice')]",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Technical Name"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='technical')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]",
"method": "emptyValue",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Technical Email"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='technical')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='email')]",
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Technical Phone"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='technical')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[1].type=='voice')]",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
},
{
"name": {
"type": "Technical Fax"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='technical')].
vcardArray[1][?(@[1].type=='fax')]",
"reason": {
"type": "Client request",
"description": "Client requested the field redacted"
}
},
{
"name": {
"description": "Administrative Contact"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='administrative')]",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"description": "Refer to the technical contact"
}
}
{
"name": {
"description": "Billing Contact"
},
"path": "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='billing')]",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"description": "Refer to the registrant contact"
}
}
]
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
}
Figure 6: Redacted RDAP Lookup Response
Example unredacted version of an RDAP search response:
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
{
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0"
],
"domainSearchResults":[
{
"objectClassName": "domain",
"handle": "ABC121",
"ldhName": "example1.com",
"links":[
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"rel":"self",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
},
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"rel":"related",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
}
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "domain",
"handle": "ABC122",
"ldhName": "example2.com",
"links":[
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"rel":"self",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
},
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"rel":"related",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
}
]
}
]
}
Figure 7: Unredacted RDAP Search Response
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
Example redacted version of an RDAP search response:
{
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0",
"redacted_0.1"
],
"domainSearchResults":[
{
"objectClassName": "domain",
"ldhName": "example1.com",
"links":[
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"rel":"self",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
},
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"rel":"related",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example1.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
}
],
"redacted": [
{
"name": {
"type": "Registry Domain ID"
},
"path": "$.domainSearchResults[0].handle",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
}
]
},
{
"objectClassName": "domain",
"ldhName": "example2.com",
"links":[
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"rel":"self",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
},
{
"value":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"rel":"related",
"href":"https://example.com/rdap/domain/example2.com",
"type":"application/rdap+json"
}
],
"redacted": [
{
"name": {
"type": "Registry Domain ID"
},
"path": "$.domainSearchResults[1].handle",
"pathLang": "jsonpath",
"method": "removal",
"reason": {
"type": "Server policy"
}
}
]
}
]
}
Figure 8: Redacted RDAP Search Response
5. JSONPath Considerations
JSONPath [I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base] is the default JSON path expression
language. This section covers considerations for servers using
[I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base] to identify redacted RDAP fields with the
"path" member of redacted objects in the "redacted" member. The list
of JSONPath considerations include:
1. Use absolute paths with the '$' JSONPath element. An example is
"$.handle" for the "Registry Domain ID" in a lookup response or
"$.domainSearchResults[0].handle" in a search response.
2. Validate a JSONPath expression using a non-redacted RDAP
response, where evaluating the expression results in returning
the redacted field.
3. Reference the removed object field when redacting an entire
object by the Redaction by Removal Method (Section 3.1), where
all of the object's child fields are explicitly removed. An
example is "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='administrative')]" for the
entire "Administrative Contact".
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
4. When an entity has multiple roles, include "redacted" members for
each role using the role index. This will result in duplicate
"redacted" members, but will enable the client to treat redaction
consistently when there is a single role per entity or multiple
roles per entity. An example is when the "roles" member has the
value '["registrant","administrative"]', redacting the "name"
member of the entity will result in two "redacted" members with
the JSONPath expressions "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')]
.vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]" and "$.entities[?(@.roles[1]=='
administrative')].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]".
5. When there are multiple entities with the same role, include
"redacted" members for each entity using the entity index instead
of the role. A JSONPath can be created that identifies the
entity based on an index of a role selector nodelist, such as
"$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='technical')][0]" for the first entity
with the "technical" role. Using the entity index, such as
"$.entities[1]", is simpler and recommended.
6. Reference the removed field when using the Redaction by Removal
Method (Section 3.1). An example is "$.handle" for the "Registry
Domain ID".
7. Reference index 0 of the jCard [RFC7095] property array, which is
the jCard [RFC7095] "name" property, with a filter expression
containing the name of the field, when redacting a jCard
[RFC7095] field using the Redaction by Removal Method
(Section 3.1). An example is "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registra
nt')].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='email')]" for the "Registrant
Email".
8. Reference jCard [RFC7095] field value or values redacted by array
index 3 and greater, when redacting a jCard [RFC7095] field using
the Redaction by Empty Value Method (Section 3.2). The jCard
[RFC7095] property array index 3 and greater contain the property
values, where the property values set with an empty value are
referenced directly in place of the jCard [RFC7095] property
name. Servers can then systematically redact jCard [RFC7095]
field value or values based on the JSONPath expressions and
clients will directly know which jCard [RFC7095] property values
have been redacted. An example is "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='reg
istrant')].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]" for the "Registrant
Name" or "$.entities[?(@.roles[0]=='registrant')].vcardArray[1][?
(@[0]=='adr')][3][5]" for the "Registrant Postal Code".
9. RDAP extensions should define any special JSONPath considerations
required to identify redacted RDAP fields if these considerations
are insufficient.
6. IANA Considerations
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
6.1. RDAP Extensions Registry
IANA is requested to register the following value in the RDAP
Extensions Registry:
Extension identifier: redacted_0.1
Registry operator: Any
Published specification: This document.
Contact: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Intended usage: This extension identifies the redacted fields in an
RDAP response.
6.2. JSON Values Registry
Section 10.2 of [RFC9083] defines the JSON Values Registry with pre-
defined Type field values and the use of the "Expert Review" policy
defined in [RFC8126]. Two new JSON Values Registry Type field values
are used to register pre-defined redacted name and reason values:
"redacted name": Redacted name being registered. The registered
redacted name is referenced using the "type" field of the
redacted "name" field.
"redacted reason": Redacted reason being registered. The registered
redacted reason is referenced using the "type" field of the
redacted "reason" field.
7. Implementation Status
Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to
RFC 7942 [RFC7942] before publication.
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942
[RFC7942]. The description of implementations in this section is
intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing
drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual
implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF.
Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the information
presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not
intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available
implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that
other implementations may exist.
According to RFC 7942 [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and
working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the
benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols
more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this
information as they see fit".
7.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Server
Responsible Organization: Institute of Informatics and Telematics of
National Research Council (IIT-CNR)/Registro.it
Location: https://rdap.pubtest.nic.it/
Description: This implementation includes support for RDAP queries
using data from the public test environment of .it ccTLD. The
"redacted" array can be returned in the response to the domain lookup
that is the only available to anonymous users.
Level of Maturity: This is an "alpha" test implementation.
Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features described
in this specification.
Contact Information: Mario Loffredo, mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it
8. Security Considerations
The server including a redacted signal provides an unauthorized
client additional information related to the existence of data.
Servers MAY exclude the redacted members for RDAP fields that are
considered a privacy issue in providing a data existence signal.
9. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the following persons for their feedback
and suggestions: Marc Blanchet, Scott Hollenbeck, Mario Loffredo,
Gustavo Lozano, and Rick Wilhelm.
10. References
10.1. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact]
Loffredo, M. and G. Brown, "Using JSContact in
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) JSON Responses",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-regext-rdap-
jscontact-08, 15 February 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-regext-
rdap-jscontact-08>.
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
10.2. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base]
Gössner, S., Normington, G., and C. Bormann, "JSONPath:
Query expressions for JSON", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-03, 16 January 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
jsonpath-base-03>.
[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>.
[RFC6350] Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6350, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6350>.
[RFC7095] Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7095, January 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7095>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[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>.
[RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.
[RFC9082] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9082>.
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
[RFC9083] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "JSON Responses for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 9083, DOI 10.17487/RFC9083, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9083>.
Appendix A. Change History
A.1. Change from 00 to 01
1. Changed rdapConformance to use pointed "redacted_0.1" value to
support structural changes of the extension up to the target of
"redacted_1.0".
2. Updates based on the Gustavo Lozano feedback:
1. Updated the language to change the special treatment of jCard
to be more generic for future RDAP extensions that leverage
fixed length JSON arrays.
2. Added "RDAP extensions should define any special JSONPath
considerations required to identify redacted RDAP fields if
the these considerations are insufficient." to the JSONPath
Considerations section to generalize it.
3. Updates based on the Marc Blanchet feedback:
1. Added a reference to draft-ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact as an
example of an RDAP extension that is suited for the Redaction
by Removal Method based on the lack of dependency on
positional JSON arrays.
2. Added support for registered and unregistered (free-form)
redaction reasons by changing the "reason" property to be a
JSON object with the "type" and "description" properties.
The "type" property includes registration in the IANA JSON
Values Registry.
3. Added a "JSON Values Registry" section in the IANA
Considersations section to define the "redaction reason" JSON
Values Registry Type values to support the registration of
redaction reasons.
4. Updates based on the Mario Loffredo feedback:
1. Added support for registered and unregistered (free-form)
redaction names by changing the "reason" property to be a
JSON object with the "type" and "description" properties.
The "type" property includes registration in the IANA JSON
Values Registry.
2. Added a "JSON Values Registry" section in the IANA
Considersations section to define the "redaction name" JSON
Values Registry Type values to support the registration of
redaction names.
3. Added a JSONPath Considerations item associated with handling
entities with multiple roles.
4. Added language to restrict the extension to responses.
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
A.2. Change from 01 to 02
1. Updates to add support for RDAP search responses:
1. Replaced "RDAP lookup response" with "RDAP response"
throughout the draft to expand the scope to include search.
2. Updated the description in the second paragraph of the
Introduction to cover both a lookup response and a search
response.
3. Added an example of the use of an absoluate path for a search
response to the "JSONPath Considerations" section.
4. Added a description of the placement of the "redacted" member
in a lookup response and a search response in the ""redacted"
Member" section.
5. Added an example of an unredacted search response and a
redacted search response in the ""redacted" Member" section.
A.3. Change from 02 to 03
1. Fixed mismatch of the extension identifier, which was updated to
"redacted_0.1" throughout the draft based on feedback from Mario
Loffredo.
2. Added the JSONPath Considerations item associated with redacting
fields for multiple entities with the same role based on
implementation feedback from Mario Loffredo.
3. Added the Implementation Status section that includes the server
implementation by Mario Loffredo.
4. Added use of numbered figures for easy reference for JSON Values
Registry registrations.
5. Updated the example unredacted and redacted lookup responses to
include the "objectClassName" and "handle" members.
6. Changed RFC7482 and RFC7483 references to RFC9082 and RFC9083,
respectively.
Authors' Addresses
James Gould
VeriSign, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
United States of America
Email: jgould@verisign.com
URI: http://www.verisigninc.com
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft Redacted Fields in RDAP March 2022
David Smith
VeriSign, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
United States of America
Email: dsmith@verisign.com
URI: http://www.verisigninc.com
Jody Kolker
GoDaddy Inc.
14455 N. Hayden Rd. #219
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
United States of America
Email: jkolker@godaddy.com
URI: http://www.godaddy.com
Roger Carney
GoDaddy Inc.
14455 N. Hayden Rd. #219
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
United States of America
Email: rcarney@godaddy.com
URI: http://www.godaddy.com
Gould, et al. Expires 3 September 2022 [Page 34]