Skip to main content

Easy DNSSEC Key Publish
draft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds-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 is Replaced
Authors Ólafur Guðmundsson , Warren "Ace" Kumari
Last updated 2013-02-18
Replaced by draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-trust-maintainance, draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-trust-maintainance, RFC 7344
Stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds-00
template                                                       W. Kumari
Internet-Draft                                                    Google
Intended status: Informational                            O. Gudmundsson
Expires: August 22, 2013                                   Shinkuro Inc.
                                                              G. Barwood
                                                       February 18, 2013

                        Easy DNSSEC Key Publish
                     draft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds-00

Abstract

   This document describes a method to allow DNS operators to more
   easily publish updated DNSSEC Key Signing Keys.  This document does
   not address the initial configuration of trust anchors for a domain.

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 http://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 August 22, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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
   (http://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.

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     1.1.  Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  CDS Resource Record Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.  CDS Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     4.1.  Periodic check by parental agent  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.  Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     5.1.  Going unsigned  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   Appendix A.  Changes / Author Notes.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

1.  Introduction

   When a DNS operator first signs their zone they need to communicate
   their DS record(s) (or DNSKEY(s)) to their parent through some out of
   band method.  In many cases this is a fairly annoying and manual
   process.  Unfortunately, every time the child rolls their KSK (Key
   Signing Key) key they have to repeat the process, possibly multiple
   times.  As this is a manual process DNS operators often avoid rolling
   their keys, as they don't want to have to do go through the annoyance
   of publishing the new keys.

   This document describes a method to automate publication of
   subsequent DS records, after the initial one has been published.

   Readers are expected to be familiar with DNSSEC, including [RFC4033],
   [RFC4034], [RFC4035] and [RFC6781].

   This document is a compilation of two earlier drafts,
   draft-barwood-dnsop-ds-publish and draft-wkumari-dnsop-ezkeyroll

   This document outlines a technique in which the parent (often
   registrar / registry) periodically polls its signed children and
   automatically publish new DS records.  To a large extent the
   procedures this document follows are in [RFC6781] section 4.1.2

   This technique is in some ways similar to RFC 5011 style rollovers,
   but for subdomains instead of trust anchors

1.1.  Requirements notation

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

2.  Background

   For ease of explanation, we will mainly describe the "standard" case
   where a DNS operator registers a domain though a registrar, who then
   publishes the information in a registry, but this same technique can
   be used anywhere where a child needs to update their DS resource
   record.  We will also assume that the registrar provides a web
   interface for adding DS resource record information; in a
   distressingly large number of cases the registrar doesn't (yet) have
   this functionality, and so the operator has to communicate their DS
   to the registrar through email or a telephone call, but the actual
   mechanism doesn't matter.  We will further assume that the registrant
   is also the DNS operator - this technique is expandable to any

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

   relationship, but the background explanation gets more tricky.

   After an DNS operator first signs its zone, they login to the
   registrar's web interface and then paste in the zone's DS
   information.  The registrar then communicates the DS record to the
   registry who publishes it.  The action of logging in through the web
   interface authenticates that the user is authorized to publish in the
   zone.

   Eventually the registrant may want to publish a new DS record in the
   parent, either because they are rolling their keys, or because they
   want to publish a stand-by key DS record.  This involves performing
   the same process -- logging into a web interfaces, selecting the
   domain, finding the link to change DNSSEC information, pasting (or
   typing) their DS record (often in a non-standard format) and clicking
   submit (in a real world test, this took 12 steps and approximately 3
   minutes).  As humans (especially DNS operators :-)) dislike tedious,
   repetitive steps they often avoid rolling their DNSSEC keys to avoid
   having to perform this.

3.  CDS Resource Record Format

   The wire and presentation format of the CDS ("Child DS") record is
   identical to the DS record.  IANA has allocated RR code 59 for the
   CDS record.

   However no special processing is performed by authoritative servers
   or by resolvers, when serving or resolving.  CDS unlike a DS resides
   in the child zone.

   The CDS record MUST be signed with a key that has the Secure Entry
   Point flag set, just like the DNSKEY record.

4.  CDS Behavior

   The CDS RRset MAY be used by the parent (or a parental
   representative) to update the DS RRset in the parent zone we call
   this entity "parental agent".

   In many environments (for example, gTLDs) the parent will be a
   registry, and is expected to not have direct contact with the child
   (registrant).  In these cases, the registrar (or a contractor for the
   registrar) will be the one that queries the child zone for the CDS
   record, and if found, will publish it in the parent (probably using
   [RFC5734]).  It is conceivable that this could be a "value added"
   service.

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

   Transfer of the contents of the CDS record can be accomplished in a
   number of ways.  A parental agent MAY periodically check the child
   zone to see if the CDS RRset has changed.  The child MAY request that
   the parent check the CDS set via registration interface, or via some
   other automated mechanism.

   The child MUST make sure that the CDS RRset is at all times
   validatable using a DNSKEY that is referenced from the current DS set
   in the parent.  This can be accomplished by making sure that at all
   times during a KEY rollover there are either two DS records or two
   DNSKEY records with SEP bit published in the DNS.

   When using CDS to publish its key rollover information it is the
   child's responsibility to monitor the parent for changes to the DS
   RRset before performing the next action in the key rollover sequence.
   What this implies is that the child MUST NOT follow a strict timeline
   but rather strict sequence of steps with time checks.

4.1.  Periodic check by parental agent

   In this case the parental agent will query each child zone that has a
   DS RRset, looking for CDS RRset

   If present the parental agent MUST validate [[RFC4035]] the CDS
   RRset.  If the validation succeeds with a DNSKEY that is represented
   in the current DS RRset in parent.  The parenteral agent should
   submit a request to the registry to publish the contents of the CDS
   RR(s) as the new a DS record(s) for that zone.  The parental agent
   SHOULD log the date and time when of this action including the
   signature initiation time on the CDS record.  The registry should log
   if possible the source of the update, user interface/CDS etc.

5.  Usage

   The parent zone SHOULD ensure that old versions of the CDS RRset do
   not overwrite newer versions, which can occur the parent performs the
   checks too frequently.  In that case when there is a delay updating
   secondary name servers for the child zone.  This MAY be accomplished
   by checking that the signature inception in the RRSIG for CDS is
   newer

   If the CDS RRset does not exist, the parent MUST take no action.
   Specifically it MUST NOT delete the existing DS RRset.

   If the child zone loses the secret key(s) for the zone, and needs to
   reset the parent DS RRset, this must be accomplished by an out-of-
   band mechanism not defined here.

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

   To mitigate situations where a key signing key has been compromised,
   the parent zone MAY take extra security measures, for example
   informing ( by email or other methods ) the zone administrator of the
   change, and delaying the acceptance of the new DS RRset for some
   period of time.  However the precise out-of-band measures that a
   parent zone SHOULD take are outside the scope of this document.

5.1.  Going unsigned

   In theory the child can use the CDS to reflect the parent to remove
   the DS records.  This can be accomplished by publishing CDS record
   with the following contents:

   @ IN CDS 0 0 0

   This is an suggestion and its security implications have not been
   fully examined but an RFC5011 like process should be used before this
   is accepted.

   If a child zone has gone unsigned, i.e. no DNSKEY and no RRsigs in
   the zone, the parental representative MAY treat that as intent to go
   unsigned.  (NEEDS DISCUSSION).

6.  IANA Considerations

   IANA has assigned RR Type code 59 for CDS.  This was done for an
   earlier version of this document (draft-barwood-dnsop-ds-publish).

7.  Security Considerations

   [ This needs a more work, suggestions welcome.]

   In the event of a compromise of the server generating signatures for
   a zone, attacker may be able to generate and publish new CDS records.
   These will be picked up by this technique and so may allow the
   attacker to extend the effective time of his attack.  This can be
   dealt with by contacting the parent (potentially though a registrar
   web interface) and removing any compromised DS keys.

   A compromise of the registrar, will not be mitigated by this
   technique

   While it may be tempting, this should NOT be used for initial
   enrolment of keys since there is no way to ensure that the initial
   key is the correct one.

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

   The CDS RRtype should allow for enhanced security by simplifying
   process.  Since rollover is automated, updating a DS RRset by other
   means may be regarded as unusual and subject to extra security
   checks.

8.  Acknowledgements

   This is by no means the invention of the authors.  This idea has been
   floating around for a long time.  This simply documents it for
   discussion.

   We would like to thank: Joe Abley, Roy Arends, Jim Galvin, Cricket
   Liu, Matt Larson, Olaf Kolkman, Suzanne Woolfe.

   There were a large number of other folk with whom we discussed this,
   apologies for not remembering everyone.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [IANA.AS_Numbers]
              IANA, "Autonomous System (AS) Numbers",
              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-sidr-iana-objects]
              Manderson, T., Vegoda, L., and S. Kent, "RPKI Objects
              issued by IANA", draft-ietf-sidr-iana-objects-03 (work in
              progress), May 2011.

   [RFC4033]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
              Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
              RFC 4033, March 2005.

   [RFC4034]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
              Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions",
              RFC 4034, March 2005.

   [RFC4035]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
              Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
              Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005.

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft                  ezkeyroll                  February 2013

   [RFC5734]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
              Transport over TCP", STD 69, RFC 5734, August 2009.

   [RFC6781]  Kolkman, O., Mekking, W., and R. Gieben, "DNSSEC
              Operational Practices, Version 2", RFC 6781,
              December 2012.

Appendix A.  Changes / Author Notes.

   [RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication ]

   From -00 to -01.

   o  Nothing changed in the template!

Authors' Addresses

   Warren Kumari
   Google
   1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
   Mountain View, CA  94043
   US

   Email: warren@kumari.net

   Olafur Gudmundsson
   Shinkuro Inc.
   4922 Fairmont Av, Suite 250
   Bethsda, MD  20814
   USA

   Email: ogud@ogud.com

   George Barwood
   33 Sandpiper Close
   Gloucester  GL2 4LZ
   United Kingdom

   Email: warren@kumari.net

Kumari, et al.           Expires August 22, 2013                [Page 8]