Merkle Integrity Content Encoding
draft-thomson-http-mice-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2016-10-30
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                         M. Thomson
Internet-Draft                                                   Mozilla
Intended status: Standards Track                        October 30, 2016
Expires: May 3, 2017

                   Merkle Integrity Content Encoding
                       draft-thomson-http-mice-02

Abstract

   This memo introduces a content-coding for HTTP that provides
   progressive integrity for message contents.  This integrity
   protection can be evaluated on a partial representation, allowing a
   recipient to process a message as it is delivered while retaining
   strong integrity protection.

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 May 3, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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.

Thomson                    Expires May 3, 2017                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                    MICE                      October 2016

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Notational Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  The "mi-sha256" HTTP Content Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Content Encoding Structure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Validating Integrity Proofs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  The MI HTTP Header Field  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  MI Header Field Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Simple Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Example with Multiple Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.1.  Message Truncation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.2.  Algorithm Agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.1.  The "mi-sha256" HTTP Content Encoding . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.2.  MI Header Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.3.  The HTTP MI Parameter Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       6.3.1.  mi-sha256 parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Appendix B.  FAQ  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   Integrity protection for HTTP content is highly valuable.  HTTPS
   [RFC2818] is the most common form of integrity protection deployed,
   but that requires a direct TLS [RFC5246] connection to a host.
   However, additional integrity protection might be desirable for some
   use cases.  This might be for additional protection against failures
   or attack (see [SRI]) or because content needs to remain unmodified
   throughout multiple HTTPS-protected exchanges.

   This document describes a "mi-sha256" content-encoding (see
   Section 2) that is a progressive, hash-based integrity check based on
   Merkle Hash Trees [MERKLE].

   The means of conveying the root integrity proof used by this content
   encoding will depend on deployment requirements.  This document
Show full document text