CGA & SEND maintenance T. Cheneau
Internet-Draft M. Laurent
Updates: RFC3971,RFC3972 TMSP
(if approved) S. Shen
Expires: May 26, 2010 Huawei
M. Vanderveen
Qualcomm
November 22, 2009
ECC public key and signature support in Cryptographically Generated
Addresses (CGA) and in the Secure Neighbor Discovery (SEND)
draft-cheneau-csi-ecc-sig-agility-01
Abstract
This draft describes a mechanism to deploy Elliptic Curve
Cryptography (ECC) alongside with Cryptographically Generated
Addresses (CGA) and the Secure Neighbor Discovery (SEND). This
document provides basic skeleton to integrate new signature
algorithms in CGA and SEND.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 26, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
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 BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Choice of Elliptic Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Using ECC in CGA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Signature Type Identifier for ECC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Using ECDSA with Universal Signature Option . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix A. On the number of Universal Signature Options
supported per CGA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix B. Note for future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
1. Introduction
The usage scenarios associated with neighbor discovery have recently
been extended to include environments with mobile or nomadic nodes.
Many of these nodes have limited battery power and computing
resources. Therefore, heavy public key signing algorithms like RSA
are not feasible to support on such constrained nodes. Fortunately,
more lightweight yet secure signing algorithms do exist and have been
standardized, e.g. Elliptic Curve based algorithms.
It is then a worthwhile goal to extend secure neighbor discovery to
support this signing algorithm.
The aim of this memo is to outline options for allowing Elliptic
Curve Digital Signature Algorithm for nodes configured to perform
secure neighbor discovery operations. The present document exposes
how to use and deploy Elliptic Curve Cryptography in [RFC3972] and
[cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility]. It should be noted that the latter
document has impacts on existing specification [RFC3971].
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
2. Choice of Elliptic Curve
This document follows NIST's recommendation on the usage of various
Elliptic Curves as per [FIPS-186-3]. For the sake of simplicity,
this document only describes the use of three proposed curves, namely
curve P-256 (aka secp256r1), curve P-384 (aka secp384r1) and curve
P-521 (aka secp521r1).
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
3. Using ECC in CGA
The CGA generation and verification processes remain unmodified from
the processes described in [RFC3972]. However, we extend section 3
of [RFC3972], as it contains RSA specific text. We add that, when
ECDSA is used, the AlgorithmIdentifier, contained in ASN.1 structure
of type SubjectPublicKeyInfo, must be the (unrestricted) id-
ecPublicKey algorithm identifier, which is OID 1.2.840.10045.2.1, and
the subjectPublicKey MUST be formatted as an ECC Public Key,
specified in Section 2.2 of [RFC5480].
Note that the ECC key lengths are determined by the namedCurves
parameter stored in ECParameters field of the AlgorithmIdentifier.
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
4. Signature Type Identifier for ECC
In the document [cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility], a field named
Signature Type Identifier is used by the Supported Signature
Algorithm Option and the Universal Signature Option (that replaces
the RSA Signature Option). This field indicates the Signature
Algorithm available on the node to generate or verify the Digital
Signature field of the Universal Signature Option.
This document describes new values for three different signature
algorithms. These values are extracted from the IANA-defined numbers
for the IKEv2 protocol, i.e. IANA registry named "IKEv2
Authentication Method" and are the following:
o Value 9 is ECDSA with SHA-256 on the P-256 curve
o Value 10 is ECDSA with SHA-384 on the P-384 curve
o Value 11 is ECDSA with SHA-512 on the P-521 curve
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
5. Using ECDSA with Universal Signature Option
The document [cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility] proposes the Universal
Signature Option (extended from the RSA Signature Option of
[RFC3971]). This option adds a new Signature Type Identifier field
that identifies the signature algorithm used during the generation of
the digital signature field.
When the value of the Signature Type Identifier field is 9, 10 or 11,
this Digital Signature field is computed and verified using the ECDSA
signature algorithm (as defined on [SEC1]) and hash function
corresponding to the Signature Type Identifier field. The data on
which the signature is performed are described in
[cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility].
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
6. Security Considerations
This memo defines the usage of the ECC Public Key and Signature
Algorithm in CGA and SEND. Table 1 (from [SP800-57]), presents a
comparison between the length of the RSA keys and their equivalent
(security-wise) ECC keys.
+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| RSA key length (bits) | ECC key length (bits) |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| 3072 | 256 |
| | |
| 7680 | 384 |
| | |
| 15360 | 512 |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+
Table 1: Strength equivalence between Elliptic Curve and RSA Public
Keys
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
7. IANA Considerations
This document does not request any new IANA allocations.
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC3972] Aura, T., "Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)",
RFC 3972, March 2005.
[RFC3971] Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure
Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", RFC 3971, March 2005.
[RFC5480] Turner, S., Brown, D., Yiu, K., Housley, R., and T. Polk,
"Elliptic Curve Cryptography Subject Public Key
Information", RFC 5480, March 2009.
[cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility]
Cheneau, T., Laurent, M., Shen, S., and M. Vanderveen,
"Signature Algorithm Agility in the Secure Neighbor
Discovery (SEND) Protocol",
draft-cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility-01 (work in progress),
November 2009.
8.2. Informative References
[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC3756] Nikander, P., Kempf, J., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Neighbor
Discovery (ND) Trust Models and Threats", RFC 3756,
May 2004.
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
September 2007.
[FIPS.180-2]
National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Secure
Hash Standard", FIPS PUB 180-2, August 2002, <http://
csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-2/fips180-2.pdf>.
[FIPS-186-3]
National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Digital
Signature Standard", FIPS PUB 186-3, June 2009.
[SP800-57]
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"Special Publication 800-57: Recommendation for Key
Management - Part 1 (Revised)", SP SP 800-57, March 2007.
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
[SEC1] Standards for Efficient Cryptography Group, "SEC 1:
Elliptic Curve Cryptography", September 2000,
<http://secg.org>.
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
Appendix A. On the number of Universal Signature Options supported per
CGA
+--------------------------+----------------------------------------+
| Name of the elliptic | Size of the DER-encoded Public Key |
| curve | (bytes) |
+--------------------------+----------------------------------------+
| P-256 | 88 |
| | |
| P-384 | 120 |
| | |
| P-521 | 158 |
+--------------------------+----------------------------------------+
Table 2: Common sizes for DER-encoded ECC Public Key
+-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+
| Name of the elliptic | Size of the Digital Signature field |
| curve | (without padding) |
+-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+
| P-256 | 71 |
| | |
| P-384 | 104 |
| | |
| P-521 | 139 |
+-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+
Table 3: Common sizes of the Digital Signature field when using ECDSA
(+ DER encoding)
Appendix A of document [cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility] emphasises the
impact of the Public Key size and the number of Universal Signature
Options on size of the final message. This Appendix proposes to
extend previous document and to add values for ECC. Table 2 provides
size for the commonly used DER-encoded ECC Public Keys. Table 3
presents common sizes for Digital Signature field when using ECDSA.
Reusing the value computed in [cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility], we
deduce that a Router Advertisement carrying a Prefix Information
Option and a Source Link-Layer Option sent from a CGA formed with a
P-256 EC Public and protected by a corresponding ECDSA signature is
328 bytes long. This can be compared with the same message using a
CGA carrying a 1024 bits RSA whose length is 456 bytes.
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
Appendix B. Note for future work
When specifying a new type of Signature Algorithm, a new draft may
reuse the skeleton of this document by replacing ECC/ECDSA by the
appropriate terminology. In this case, the new draft should include
an appendix similar to Appendix A for a comparison with already
specified signature algorithms.
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft ECC PK and sig. support in CGA and SEND November 2009
Authors' Addresses
Tony Cheneau
Institut TELECOM, TELECOM SudParis, CNRS SAMOVAR UMR 5157
9 rue Charles Fourier
Evry 91011
France
Email: tony.cheneau@it-sudparis.eu
Maryline Laurent
Institut TELECOM, TELECOM SudParis, CNRS SAMOVAR UMR 5157
9 rue Charles Fourier
Evry 91011
France
Email: maryline.laurent@it-sudparis.eu
Sean Shen
Huawei
4, South 4th Street, Zhongguancun
Beijing 100190
P.R. China
Email: sean.s.shen@gmail.com
Michaela Vanderveen
Qualcomm
Email: mvandervn@gmail.com
Cheneau, et al. Expires May 26, 2010 [Page 14]