Skip to main content

Mandatory-to-Implement Algorithms for Authors and Recipients of Software Update for the Internet of Things manifests
draft-ietf-suit-mti-00

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 Brendan Moran , Øyvind Rønningstad , Akira Tsukamoto
Last updated 2023-03-29 (Latest revision 2023-03-13)
Replaces draft-moran-suit-mti
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-suit-mti-00
SUIT                                                            B. Moran
Internet-Draft                                               Arm Limited
Intended status: Standards Track                          Ø. Rønningstad
Expires: 14 September 2023                          Nordic Semiconductor
                                                            A. Tsukamoto
                                                           13 March 2023

Mandatory-to-Implement Algorithms for Authors and Recipients of Software
              Update for the Internet of Things manifests
                         draft-ietf-suit-mti-00

Abstract

   This document specifies algorithm profiles for SUIT manifest parsers
   and authors to ensure better interoperability.  These profiles apply
   specifically to a constrained node software update use case.

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 14 September 2023.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2023 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.

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Algorithms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Digest Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Authentication Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.2.1.  Symmetric Authentication Algorithm  . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.2.2.  Asymmetric Classical Authentication Algorithms  . . .   3
       2.2.3.  Asymmetric Post-Quantum Authentication Algorithms . .   4
     2.3.  Key Exchange Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.3.1.  Symmetric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.3.2.  Asymmetric Classical  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.4.  Encryption Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Profiles  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.   Symmetric MTI profile: suit-sha256-hmac-a128-ccm . . . .   4
     3.2.  Current Asymmetric MTI Profile 1:
           suit-sha256-es256-ecdh-a128gcm  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.3.  Current Asymmetric MTI Profile 2:
           suit-sha256-eddsa-ecdh-a128gcm  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.4.  Future Asymmetric MTI Profile:
           suit-sha256-hsslms-hpke-a128gcm . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.5.  Other Profiles: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  A.  Full CDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   Mandatory algorithms may change over time due to an evolving threat
   landscape.  Algorithms are grouped into algorithm profiles to account
   for this.  Profiles may be deprecated over time.  SUIT will define
   four choices of MTI profile specifically for constrained node
   software update.  These profiles are:

   *  One Symmetric MTI profile

   *  Two "Current" Asymmetric MTI profiles

   *  One "Future" Asymmetric MTI profile

   At least one MTI algorithm in each category MUST be FIPS qualified.

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

   Because SUIT presents an asymmetric communication profile, with
   powerful/complex manifest authors and constrained manifest
   recipients, the requirements for Recipients and Authors are
   different.

   Recipients MAY choose which MTI profile they wish to implement.  It
   is RECOMMENDED that they implement the "Future" Asymmetric MTI
   profile.  Recipients MAY implement any number of other profiles.

   Authors MUST implement all MTI profiles.  Authors MAY implement any
   number of other profiles.

   Other use-cases of SUIT MAY define their own MTI algorithms.

2.  Algorithms

   The algorithms that form a part of the profiles defined in this
   document are grouped into:

   *  Digest Algorithms

   *  Authentication Algorithms

   *  Key Exchange Algorithms

   *  Encryption Algorithms

   The COSE algorithm ID [IANA-COSE] for each algorithm is given in
   parentheses.

2.1.  Digest Algorithms

   *  SHA-256 (-16)

2.2.  Authentication Algorithms

   Authentication Algorithms are divided into three groups: Symmetric,
   Asymmetric Classical, and Asymmetric Post-Quantum

2.2.1.  Symmetric Authentication Algorithm

   *  HMAC-256 (5)

2.2.2.  Asymmetric Classical Authentication Algorithms

   *  ES256 (-7)

   *  EdDSA (-8)

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 3]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

2.2.3.  Asymmetric Post-Quantum Authentication Algorithms

   *  HSS-LMS (-46) [RFC8778]

2.3.  Key Exchange Algorithms

   Key Exchange Algorithms are divided into two groups: Symmetric, and
   Asymmetric Classical

2.3.1.  Symmetric

   *  A128 (-3)

2.3.2.  Asymmetric Classical

   *  COSE HPKE (TBD)

   *  ECDH-ES + HKDF-256 (-25)

2.4.  Encryption Algorithms

   *  A128GCM (1)

3.  Profiles

   Recognized profiles are defined below.

3.1.   Symmetric MTI profile: suit-sha256-hmac-a128-ccm

   This profile requires the following algorithms:

   *  SHA-256

   *  HMAC-256

   *  A128W Key Wrap

   *  AES-CCM-16-128-128

3.2.  Current Asymmetric MTI Profile 1: suit-sha256-es256-ecdh-a128gcm

   This profile requires the following algorithms:

   *  SHA-256

   *  ES256

   *  ECDH

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 4]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

   *  AES-128-GCM

3.3.  Current Asymmetric MTI Profile 2: suit-sha256-eddsa-ecdh-a128gcm

   This profile requires the following algorithms:

   *  SHA-256

   *  EDDSA

   *  ECDH

   *  AES-128-GCM

3.4.  Future Asymmetric MTI Profile: suit-sha256-hsslms-hpke-a128gcm

   This profile requires the following algorithms:

   *  SHA-256

   *  HSS-LMS

   *  HPKE

   *  AES-128-GCM

3.5.  Other Profiles:

   Optional classical and PQC profiles are defined below.

   *  suit-sha256-eddsa-ecdh-es-chacha-poly

      -  SHA-256

      -  EdDSA

      -  ECDH-ES + HKDF-256

      -  ChaCha20 + Poly1305

   *  suit-sha256-falcon512-hpke-a128gcm

      -  SHA-256

      -  Falcon-512

      -  HPKE

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 5]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

      -  AES-128-GCM

   *  suit-shake256-dilithium-kyber-a128gcm

      -  SHAKE256

      -  Crystals-Dilithium

      -  Crystal-Kyber

      -  AES-128GCM

4.  Security Considerations

   For the avoidance of doubt, there are scenarios where payload or
   manifest encryption are not required.  In these scenarios, the
   encryption element of the selected profile is simply not used.

5.  IANA Considerations

   TODO

   -- back

6.  A.  Full CDDL

   The following CDDL creates a subset of COSE for use with SUIT.  Both
   tagged and untagged messages are defined.  SUIT only uses tagged COSE
   messages, but untagged messages are also defined for use in protocols
   that share a ciphersuite with SUIT.

   To be valid, the following CDDL MUST have the COSE CDDL appended to
   it.  The COSE CDDL can be obtained by following the directions in
   [RFC9052], Section 1.4.

   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= suit-sha256-hmac-a128-ccm
   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= suit-sha256-es256-ecdh-a128gcm
   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= suit-sha256-eddsa-ecdh-a128gcm
   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= suit-sha256-hsslms-hpke-a128gcm

   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= SUIT_COSE_Profile_HMAC_A128CCM
   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= SUIT_COSE_Profile_ES256_ECDH_A128GCM
   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= SUIT_COSE_Profile_EDDSA_ECDH_A128GCM
   SUIT_COSE_tool_tweak /= SUIT_COSE_Profile_HSSLMS_HPKE_A128GCM

   suit-sha256-hmac-a128-ccm = [5, 12]
   suit-sha256-es256-ecdh-a128gcm = [-7, 1]
   suit-sha256-eddsa-ecdh-a128gcm = [-8, 1]

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 6]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

   suit-sha256-hsslms-hpke-a128gcm = [-46, 1]

   SUIT_COSE_Profile_HMAC_A128CCM = SUIT_COSE_Profile<5,12> .and COSE_Messages
   SUIT_COSE_Profile_ES256_ECDH_A128GCM = SUIT_COSE_Profile<-7,1> .and COSE_Messages
   SUIT_COSE_Profile_EDDSA_ECDH_A128GCM = SUIT_COSE_Profile<-8,1> .and COSE_Messages
   SUIT_COSE_Profile_HSSLMS_HPKE_A128GCM = SUIT_COSE_Profile<-46,1> .and COSE_Messages

   SUIT_COSE_Profile<authid, encid> = SUIT_COSE_Messages<authid,encid>

   SUIT_COSE_Messages<authid, encid> = SUIT_COSE_Untagged_Message<authid, encid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Tagged_Message<authid, encid>

   SUIT_COSE_Untagged_Message<authid, encid> = SUIT_COSE_Sign<authid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Sign1<authid> / SUIT_COSE_Encrypt<encid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Encrypt0<encid> / SUIT_COSE_Mac<authid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Mac0<authid>

   SUIT_COSE_Tagged_Message<authid, encid> = SUIT_COSE_Sign_Tagged<authid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Sign1_Tagged<authid> / SUIT_COSE_Encrypt_Tagged<encid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Encrypt0_Tagged<encid> / SUIT_COSE_Mac_Tagged<authid> /
       SUIT_COSE_Mac0_Tagged<authid>

   ; Note: This is not the same definition as is used in COSE.
   ; It restricts a COSE header definition further without
   ; repeating the COSE definition. It should be merged
   ; with COSE by using the CDDL .and operator.
   SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<algid> = (
       protected : bstr .cbor SUIT_COSE_alg_map<algid>,
       unprotected : SUIT_COSE_header_map
   )
   SUIT_COSE_alg_map<algid> = {
       1 => algid,
       * int => any
   }

   SUIT_COSE_header_map = {
       * int => any
   }

   SUIT_COSE_Sign_Tagged<authid> = #6.98(SUIT_COSE_Sign<authid>)

   SUIT_COSE_Sign<authid> = [
       SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<authid>,
       payload : bstr / nil,
       signatures : [+ SUIT_COSE_Signature<authid>]
   ]

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 7]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

   SUIT_COSE_Signature<authid> =  [
       SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<authid>,
       signature : bstr
   ]

   SUIT_COSE_Sign1_Tagged<authid> = #6.18(SUIT_COSE_Sign1<authid>)

   SUIT_COSE_Sign1<authid> = [
       SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<authid>,
       payload : bstr / nil,
       signature : bstr
   ]

   SUIT_COSE_Encrypt_Tagged<encid> = #6.96(SUIT_COSE_Encrypt<encid>)

   SUIT_COSE_Encrypt<encid> = [
       SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<encid>,
       ciphertext : bstr / nil,
       recipients : [+SUIT_COSE_recipient<encid>]
   ]

   SUIT_COSE_recipient<encid> = [
       SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<encid>,
       ciphertext : bstr / nil,
       ? recipients : [+SUIT_COSE_recipient<encid>]
   ]

   SUIT_COSE_Encrypt0_Tagged<encid> = #6.16(SUIT_COSE_Encrypt0<encid>)

   SUIT_COSE_Encrypt0<encid> = [
       SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<encid>,
       ciphertext : bstr / nil,
   ]

   SUIT_COSE_Mac_Tagged<authid> = #6.97(SUIT_COSE_Mac<authid>)

   SUIT_COSE_Mac<authid> = [
      SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<authid>,
      payload : bstr / nil,

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 8]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

      tag : bstr,
      recipients :[+SUIT_COSE_recipient<authid>]
   ]

   SUIT_COSE_Mac0_Tagged<authid> = #6.17(SUIT_COSE_Mac0<authid>)

   SUIT_COSE_Mac0<authid> = [
      SUIT_COSE_Profile_Headers<authid>,
      payload : bstr / nil,
      tag : bstr,
   ]

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC8152]  Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)",
              RFC 8152, DOI 10.17487/RFC8152, July 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8152>.

   [RFC8778]  Housley, R., "Use of the HSS/LMS Hash-Based Signature
              Algorithm with CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)",
              RFC 8778, DOI 10.17487/RFC8778, April 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8778>.

   [RFC9052]  Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE):
              Structures and Process", STD 96, RFC 9052,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9052, August 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9052>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-suit-manifest]
              Moran, B., Tschofenig, H., Birkholz, H., Zandberg, K., and
              O. Rønningstad, "A Concise Binary Object Representation
              (CBOR)-based Serialization Format for the Software Updates
              for Internet of Things (SUIT) Manifest", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-suit-manifest-22, 27 February
              2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
              suit-manifest-22>.

   [IANA-COSE]
              "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)", 2022,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/cose/cose.xhtml>.

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023               [Page 9]
Internet-Draft             MTI SUIT Algorithms                March 2023

Authors' Addresses

   Brendan Moran
   Arm Limited
   Email: brendan.moran.ietf@gmail.com

   Øyvind Rønningstad
   Nordic Semiconductor
   Email: oyvind.ronningstad@gmail.com

   Akira Tsukamoto
   Email: akira.tsukamoto@gmail.com

Moran, et al.           Expires 14 September 2023              [Page 10]