Network Working Group R. Barnes
Internet-Draft O. Friel
Intended status: Informational Cisco
Expires: October 13, 2018 April 11, 2018
Usage of SPAKE with TLS 1.3
draft-barnes-tls-pake-00
Abstract
The pre-shared key mechanism available in TLS 1.3 is not suitable for
usage with low-entropy keys, such as passwords entered by users.
This document describes how the SPAKE password-authenticated key
exchange can be used with TLS 1.3.
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 13, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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 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.
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft TLS 1.3 SPAKE April 2018
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. TLS Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction
DISCLAIMER: This is a work-in-progress draft of MLS and has not yet
seen significant security analysis. It should not be used as a basis
for building production systems.
In some applications, it is desireable to enable a client and server
to authenticate to one another using a low-entropy pre-shared value,
such as a user-entered password.
In prior versions of TLS, this functionality has been provided by the
integration of the Secure Remote Password PAKE protocol (SRP)
[RFC5054]. The specific SRP integration described in RFC 5054 does
not immediately extend to TLS 1.3 becauseit relies on the Client Key
Exchange and Server Key Exchange messages, which no longer exist in
1.3. At a more fundamental level, the messaging patterns required by
SRP do not map cleanly to the standard TLS 1.3 handshake, which has
fewer round-trips than prior versions.
TLS 1.3 itself provides a mechanism for authentication with pre-
shared keys (PSKs). However, PSKs used with this protocol need to be
"full-entropy", because the binder values used for authentication can
be used to mount a dictionary attack on the PSK. So while the TLS
1.3 PSK mechanism is suitable for the session resumption cases for
which it is specified, it cannot be used when the client and server
share only a low-entropy secret.
Enabling TLS to address this use case effectively requires the TLS
handshake to perform a password-authenticated key establishment
(PAKE) protocol. This document describes an embedding of the SPAKE2
PAKE protocol in TLS 1.3 [I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2] [I-D.ietf-tls-tls13].
This mechanism also applies to DTLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-dtls13], but
for brevity, we will refer only to TLS throughout.
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft TLS 1.3 SPAKE April 2018
2. Terminology
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].
3. Setup
In order to use this protocol, a TLS client and server need to have
pre-provisioned the values required to execute the SPAKE2 protocol
(see Section 3.1 of [I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2]):
o A DH group "G" of order "p*h", with "p" a large prime
o Fixed elements M and N for the group
o A hash function "H"
o A password "p"
Note that the hash function "H" might be different from the hash
function associated with the ciphersuite negotiated by the two
parties. Clients offering SPAKE2 authentication SHOULD NOT offer
ciphersuites with hashes that provide different security properties
than the SPAKE hash.
The TLS client and server roles map to the "A" and "B" roles in the
SPAKE specification, respectively. The identity of the server is the
domain name sent in the "server_name" extension of the ClientHello
message. The identity of the client is an opaque octet string,
specified in the "spake2" ClientHello extension, defined below.
From the shared password, each party computes a shared integer "w" in
the following way:
``` struct { opaque client_identity<0..255>; opaque password<0..255>;
} IdentifierAndPassword;
struct { opaque salt<0..255>; opaque idpass[H.length]; }
PasswordWithContext; ```
o Encode the client's identity and the shared password into an
"IdentifierAndPassword" struct and compute its hash value "x"
under "H".
o Encode the salt and the value "x" into a PasswordWithContext
struct and compute its hash value "y" under "H".
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft TLS 1.3 SPAKE April 2018
o Set "w = y % p", interpreting "y" as an integer in network byte
order.
Note servers only need to store the integers "w", which are
effectively salted password hashes. Clients that take passwords as
input from users rather than storing them will need to know the
appropriate salt value for use with a given server.
4. TLS Extensions
A client offers to authenticate with SPAKE2 by including an "spake2"
extension in its ClientHello. The content of this exension is an
"SPAKE2ClientHello" value, specifying the client's identity, where
the identity matches that used in 'IdentifierAndPassword', and a key
share "T". The value "T" is computed as specified in
[I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2], as "T = w*M + X", where "M" is a fixed value
for the DH group and "X" is the public key of a fresh DH key pair.
The format of the key share "T" is the same as for a "KeyShareEntry"
value from the same group.
If a client sends the "spake2" extension, then it MAY also send the
"key_share" and "pre_shared_key" extensions, to allow the server to
choose an authentication mode. Unlike PSK-based authentication,
however, authentication with SPAKE2 cannot be combined with the
normal TLS ECDH mechanism.
``` struct { opaque identity<0..2^16-1>; opaque
key_exchange<1..2^16-1>; } SPAKE2Share;
struct { SPAKE2Share client_shares<0..2^16-1>; } SPAKE2ClientHello;
```
A server that receives an "spake2" extension examines the list of
client shares to see if there is one with an identity the server
recognizes. If so, the server may indicate its use of SPAKE2
authentication by including an "spake2" extension in its ServerHello.
The content of this exension is an "SPAKE2ServerHello" value,
specifying the client's identity and a key share "S". The value "S"
is computed as specified in [I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2], as "S = w*N + Y",
where "N" is a fixed value for the DH group and "Y" is the public key
of a fresh DH key pair. The format of the key share "S" is the same
as for a "KeyShareEntry" value from the same group.
Use of SPAKE2 authenication is not inconsistent with standard
certificate-based authentication of both clients and servers.
authentication are not mutually exclusive. If a server includes an
"spake2" extension in its ServerHello, it may still send the
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft TLS 1.3 SPAKE April 2018
Certificate and CertificateVerify messages, and/or send a
CertificateRequest message to the client.
If a server uses SPAKE2 authentication, then it MUST NOT send an
extension of type "key_share", "pre_shared_key", or "early_data".
"struct { SPAKE2Share server_share; } SPAKE2ServerHello; "
Based on these messages, both the client and server can compute the
shared key "K = x*(S-w*N) = y*(T-w*M)", as specified in
[I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2]. The value "K" is then used as the "(EC)DHE"
input to the TLS key schedule. The integer "w" is used as the PSK
input, encoded as an integer in network byte order, using the
smallest number of octets possible.
As with client authentication via certificates, the server has not
authenticated the client until after it has received the client's
Finished message. When a server negotiates the use of this mechanism
for authentication, it MUST NOT send application data before it has
received the client's Finished message.
5. Security Considerations
For the most part, the security properties of the password-based
authentication described in this document are the same as those
described in the Security Considerations of [I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2].
The TLS Finished MAC provides the key confirmation required for the
security of the protocol. Note that all of the elements covered by
the example confirmation hash listed in that document are also
covered by the Finished MAC:
o "A", "B", and "T" are included via the ClientHello
o "S" via the ServerHello
o "K", and "w" via the TLS key schedule
The mechanism described above does not provide protection for the
client's identity, in contrast to TLS client authentication with
certificates. If client identities are considered sensitive
[[ XXX(rlb@ipv.sx): Or maybe there's some HRR dance we could do. For
example: Server provides a key share in HRR, client does ECIES on
identity. ]]
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft TLS 1.3 SPAKE April 2018
6. IANA Considerations
This document requests that IANA add a value to the TLS ExtensionType
Registry with the following contents:
+-------+----------------+---------+-----------+
| Value | Extension Name | TLS 1.3 | Reference |
+-------+----------------+---------+-----------+
| TBD | spake2 | CH, SH | RFC XXXX |
+-------+----------------+---------+-----------+
[[ RFC EDITOR: Please replace "TBD" in the above table with the value
assigned by IANA, and replace "XXXX" with the RFC number assigned to
this document. ]]
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-tls-dtls13]
Rescorla, E., Tschofenig, H., and N. Modadugu, "The
Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version
1.3", draft-ietf-tls-dtls13-26 (work in progress), March
2018.
[I-D.ietf-tls-tls13]
Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", draft-ietf-tls-tls13-28 (work in progress),
March 2018.
[I-D.irtf-cfrg-spake2]
Ladd, W. and B. Kaduk, "SPAKE2, a PAKE", draft-irtf-cfrg-
spake2-05 (work in progress), February 2018.
[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>.
7.2. Informative References
[RFC5054] Taylor, D., Wu, T., Mavrogiannopoulos, N., and T. Perrin,
"Using the Secure Remote Password (SRP) Protocol for TLS
Authentication", RFC 5054, DOI 10.17487/RFC5054, November
2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5054>.
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft TLS 1.3 SPAKE April 2018
Authors' Addresses
Richard Barnes
Cisco
Email: rlb@ipv.sx
Owen Friel
Cisco
Email: ofriel@cisco.com
Barnes & Friel Expires October 13, 2018 [Page 7]