Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Reverse search capabilities
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-06
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 9536.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mario Loffredo , Maurizio Martinelli | ||
| Last updated | 2021-04-09 | ||
| Replaces | draft-loffredo-regext-rdap-reverse-search | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
GENART Last Call review
(of
-24)
by Susan Hares
Ready w/nits
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Associated WG milestone |
|
||
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9536 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-06
Registration Protocols Extensions M. Loffredo
Internet-Draft M. Martinelli
Intended status: Standards Track IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Expires: October 11, 2021 April 9, 2021
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Reverse search capabilities
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-06
Abstract
The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) does not include query
capabilities to find the list of domains related to a set of entities
matching a given search pattern. In the RDAP context, an entity can
be associated to any defined object class. Therefore, a reverse
search can be applied to other use cases than the classic domain-
entity scenario. This document describes RDAP query extensions that
allow servers to provide a reverse search feature based on the
relationship between any searchable object and the related entities.
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 October 11, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
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. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. RDAP Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. RDAP Conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. Paradigms to Enforce Access Control on Reverse
Search in RDAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
Reverse Whois is a service provided by many web applications that
allow users to find domain names owned by an individual or a company
starting from the owner's details, such as name and email. Even if
it has been considered useful for some legal purposes (e.g.
uncovering trademark infringements, detecting cybercrime cases), its
availability as a standardized Whois capability has been objected for
two main reasons, which now don't seem to conflict with an RDAP
implementation.
The first objection has been caused by the potential risks of privacy
violation. However, TLDs community is considering a new generation
of Registration Directory Services [ICANN-RDS1] [ICANN-RDS2]
[ICANN-RA], which provide access to sensitive data under some
permissible purposes and according to adequate policies to enforce
the requestor accreditation, authentication, authorization, and terms
and conditions of data use. It is well known that such security
policies are not implemented in Whois [RFC3912], while they are in
RDAP [RFC7481]. Therefore, RDAP permits a reverse search
implementation complying with privacy protection principles.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
Another objection to the implementation of a reverse search
capability has been connected with its impact on server processing.
Since RDAP supports search queries, the impact of both standard and
reverse searches is equivalent and can be mitigated by servers
adopting ad hoc strategies. Furthermore, the reverse search is
almost always performed by specifying an entity role (e.g.
registrant, technical contact) and this can contribute to restricting
the result set.
Reverse searches, such as finding the list of domain names associated
with contacts or nameservers may be useful to registrars as well.
Usually, registries adopt out-of-band solutions to provide results to
registrars asking for reverse searches on their domains. Possible
reasons for such requests are:
o the loss of synchronization between the registrar database and the
registry database;
o the need for such data to perform massive EPP [RFC5730] updates
(e.g. changing the contacts of a set of domains, etc.).
Currently, RDAP does not provide any way for a client to search for
the collection of domains associated with an entity [RFC7482]. A
query (lookup or search) on domains can return the array of entities
related to a domain with different roles (registrant, registrar,
administrative, technical, reseller, etc.), but the reverse operation
is not allowed. Only reverse searches to find the collection of
domains related to a nameserver (ldhName or ip) can be requested.
Since an entity can be in relationship with any RDAP object
[RFC7483], the availability of a reverse search can be common to all
resource type path segments defined for search.
The protocol described in this specification aims to extend the RDAP
query capabilities to enable the reverse search based on the
relationship between any object and the associated entities. The
extension is implemented by adding new path segments (i.e. search
paths) and using a RESTful web service [REST]. The service is
implemented using the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) [RFC7230]
and the conventions described in [RFC7480].
1.1. 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.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
2. RDAP Path Segment Specification
The new search paths are OPTIONAL extensions of those defined in
[RFC7482]. A generic reverse search path is described by the syntax:
{resource-type}/reverse/{role}?{property}=<search pattern>
The path segments are defined as in the following:
o resource-type: it MUST be one of resource type path segments
defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC7482]: "domains", "nameservers" or
"entities";
o role: it MUST be one of the roles described in Section 10.2.4 of
[RFC7483]. For role independent reverse searches, the value
"entity" MUST be used;
o property: it identifies the entity property to be used in matching
the search pattern. A pre-defined list of properties includes:
fn, handle, email, city, country, cc. The mapping between such
properties and the RDAP properties is shown in Table 1. Some of
the properties are related to jCard elements [RFC7095] but, being
jCard the JSON format for vCard [RFC6350], the corresponding
definitions are included in vCard specification. Servers MAY
implement additional properties to those defined in this document.
Partial string matching is allowed as defined in section 4.1 of
[RFC7482].
+-------------------+--------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| Reverse search | RDAP property | RFC | RFC | RFC |
| property | | 7483 | 6350 | 8605 |
+-------------------+--------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| handle | handle | 5.1. | | |
| fn | jCard fn | | 6.2.1 | |
| email | jCard email | | 6.4.2 | |
| city | locality in jCard | | 6.3.1 | |
| | adr | | | |
| country | country name in | | 6.3.1 | |
| | jCard adr | | | |
| cc | country code in | | | 3.1 |
| | jCard adr | | | |
+-------------------+--------------------+--------+--------+--------+
Table 1: Mapping between the reverse search properties and the RDAP
properties
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
https://example.com/rdap/domains/reverse/technical?handle=CID-40*
https://example.com/rdap/domains/reverse/registrant?fn=Bobby*
https://example.com/rdap/domains/reverse/registrant?cc=US
https://example.com/rdap/entites/reverse/registrar?handle=RegistrarX
Figure 1: Examples of reverse search queries
The "country" property can be used as an alternative to "cc" when
RDAP servers don't include the jCard "cc" parameter [RFC8605] in
their response.
3. RDAP Conformance
Servers complying with this specification MUST include the value
"reverse_search" in the rdapConformance property of the help response
[RFC7483]. The information needed to register this value in the
"RDAP Extensions" registry is described in Section 6.
4. Implementation Considerations
The implementation of the proposed extension is technically feasible.
Both handle and fn are used as standard path segments to search for
entities [RFC7482]. With regards to the other reverse search
properties, namely email, city and country code, the impact of their
usage on server processing is evaluated to be the same as other
existing query capabilities (e.g. wildcard prefixed search pattern)
so the risks to degrade the performance or to generate huge result
sets can be mitigated by adopting the same policies (e.g. restricting
the search functionality, limiting the rate of search requests
according to the user profile, truncating and paging the results,
returning partial responses).
5. Implementation Status
NOTE: Please remove this section and the reference to RFC 7942 prior
to publication as an RFC.
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 [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
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
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, "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 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".
5.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it
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.
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
6. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to register the following value in the RDAP
Extensions Registry:
Extension identifier: reverse_search
Registry operator: Any
Published specification: This document.
Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>
Intended usage: This extension describes reverse search query
patterns for RDAP.
7. Privacy Considerations
The use of the capability described in this document MUST be
compliant with the rules about privacy protection each RDAP provider
is subject to. Sensitive registration data MUST be protected and
accessible for permissible purposes only. This functionality SHOULD
be only accessible to authorized users and only for a specified use
case.
Already the request for this functionality could contain Personal
Identifiable Information and SHOULD therefore only be available over
HTTPS.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
Providing reverse search in RDAP carries the following threats as
described in [RFC6973]:
o Correlation
o Disclosure
o Misuse of information
Therefore, RDAP providers are REQUIRED to mitigate the risk of those
threats by implementing appropriate measures supported by security
services (see Section 8).
8. Security Considerations
Security services required to provide controlled access to the
operations specified in this document are described in [RFC7481]. A
non exhaustive list of access control paradigms an RDAP provider can
implement is presented in Appendix A.
The specification of the entity role within the reverse search path
allows the RDAP servers to implement different authorization policies
on a per-role basis.
9. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for
their contributions to this document: Tom Harrison, Scott Hollenbeck,
Francisco Arias, Gustavo Lozano, Eduardo Alvarez and Ulrich Wisser.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[OIDCC] OpenID Foundation, "OpenID Connect Core incorporating
errata set 1", November 2014,
<http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html>.
[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>.
[RFC3912] Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3912, September 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3912>.
[RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
[RFC6350] Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6350, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6350>.
[RFC6973] Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J.,
Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy
Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6973, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6973>.
[RFC7095] Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7095, January 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7095>.
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing",
RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>.
[RFC7480] Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 7480, DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>.
[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 7481, DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.
[RFC7482] Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", RFC 7482,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7482, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7482>.
[RFC7483] Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "JSON Responses for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7483,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7483, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7483>.
[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>.
[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>.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
[RFC8605] Hollenbeck, S. and R. Carney, "vCard Format Extensions:
ICANN Extensions for the Registration Data Access Protocol
(RDAP)", RFC 8605, DOI 10.17487/RFC8605, May 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8605>.
10.2. Informative References
[draft-ietf-regext-rdap-openid]
Hollenbeck, S., "Federated Authentication for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) using OpenID
Connect", <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-
regext-rdap-openid/>.
[ICANN-RA]
Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers,
"Registry Agreement", July 2017,
<https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/
agreements/agreement-approved-31jul17-en.pdf>.
[ICANN-RDS1]
Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers,
"Final Report from the Expert Working Group on gTLD
Directory Services: A Next-Generation Registration
Directory Service (RDS)", June 2014,
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-
06jun14-en.pdf>.
[ICANN-RDS2]
Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers,
"Final Issue Report on a Next-Generation gTLD RDS to
Replace WHOIS", October 2015,
<http://whois.icann.org/sites/default/files/files/final-
issue-report-next-generation-rds-07oct15-en.pdf>.
[REST] Fielding, R., "Architectural Styles and the Design of
Network-based Software Architectures", 2000,
<http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/
fielding_dissertation.pdf>.
Appendix A. Paradigms to Enforce Access Control on Reverse Search in
RDAP
Access control can be implemented according to different paradigms
introducing increasingly stringent rules. The paradigms reported
here in the following leverage the capabilities either supported
natively or provided as extensions by the OpenID Connect [OIDCC]:
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
o Role-Based Access Control: access rights are granted depending on
roles. Generally, this is done by grouping users into fixed
categories and assigning each category with static grants. A more
dynamic approach can be implemented by using the OpenID Connect
"scope" claim;
o Purpose-Based Access Control: access rules are based on the notion
of purpose which means the intended usage of some data by a user.
It can be implemented by tagging a request with the usage purpose
and making the RDAP server check the compliance between the given
purpose and the control rules applied to data to be returned. The
purpose can be stated within an out-of-band process by setting the
OpenID Connect RDAP specific "purpose" claim as defined in
[draft-ietf-regext-rdap-openid];
o Attribute-Based Access Control: rules to manage access rights are
evaluated and applied according to specific attributes describing
the context within which data are requested. It can be
implemented by setting within an out-of-band process additional
OpenID Connect claims describing the request context and making
the RDAP server check the compliance between the given context and
the control rules applied to data to be returned;
o Time-Based Access Control: data access is allowed for limited time
only. It can be implemented by assigning the users with temporary
credentials linked to access grants whose scope is limited.
Appendix B. Change Log
00: Initial working group version ported from draft-loffredo-regext-
rdap-reverse-search-04
01: Updated "Privacy Considerations" section.
02: Revised the text.
03: Refactored the query model.
04: Keepalive refresh.
05: Reorganized "Abstract". Corrected "Conventions Used in This
Document" section. Added "RDAP Conformance" section. Changed
"IANA Considerations" section. Added references to RFC7095 and
RFC8174. Other minor edits.
06: Updated "Privacy Considerations", "Security Considerations" and
"Acknowledgements" sections. Added some normative and informative
references. Added Appendix A.
Authors' Addresses
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search April 2021
Mario Loffredo
IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Via Moruzzi,1
Pisa 56124
IT
Email: mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it
URI: http://www.iit.cnr.it
Maurizio Martinelli
IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Via Moruzzi,1
Pisa 56124
IT
Email: maurizio.martinelli@iit.cnr.it
URI: http://www.iit.cnr.it
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires October 11, 2021 [Page 11]