LAMPS Working Group H. Brockhaus
Internet-Draft Siemens
Intended status: Standards Track November 2, 2020
Expires: May 6, 2021
CMP Algorithms
draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-algorithms-01
Abstract
This document describes the conventions for using several
cryptographic algorithms with the Certificate Management Protocol
(CMP). CMP is used to enroll and further manage the lifecycle of
X.509 certificates.
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 May 6, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Message Digest Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. SHA2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Signature Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. DSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. RSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. ECDSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Key Management Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Key Agreement Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.1. Diffie-Hellman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.2. ECDH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Key Transport Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2.1. RSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3. Symmetric Key-Encryption Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3.1. AES Key Wrap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.4. Key Derivation Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.4.1. Password-based Key Derivation Function 2 . . . . . . 8
5. Content Encryption Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. AES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Message Authentication Code Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Password-based MAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2. Diffie-Hellman-based MAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.3. SHA2-based HMAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix A. Algorithm Use Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.1. Algorithm Profile for PKI Management Message Profiles . . 15
A.2. Algorithm Profile for Lightweight CMP Profile . . . . . . 16
Appendix B. History of changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction
[RFC Editor: please delete]: !!! The change history was moved to
Appendix B !!!
1.1. 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 BCP 14 [RFC2119]
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
[RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown
here.
2. Message Digest Algorithms
This section specifies the conventions employed by CMP
implementations that support SHA-1 or SHA2 algorithm family.
Digest algorithm identifiers are located in the hashAlg field of
OOBCertHash, the owf field of Challenge, PBMParameter, and
DHBMParameter, and the digestAlgorithms field of SignedData and the
digestAlgorithm field of SignerInfo.
Digest values are located in the hashVal field of OOBCertHash, the
witness field of Challenge, and the certHash field of CertStatus. In
addition, digest values are input to signature algorithms.
2.1. SHA2
The SHA2 message digest algorithm family is defined in FIPS Pub 180-4
[FIPS180-4].
The message digest algorithms SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512
produce a 224-bit are identified by the following object identifiers
(OIDs):
id-sha224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2) country(16)
us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3) nistalgorithm(4)
hashalgs(2) 4 }
id-sha256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2) country(16)
us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3) nistalgorithm(4)
hashalgs(2) 1 }
id-sha384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2) country(16)
us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3) nistalgorithm(4)
hashalgs(2) 2 }
id-sha512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2) country(16)
us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3) nistalgorithm(4)
hashalgs(2) 3 }
Further conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 5754
Section 2 [RFC5754].
3. Signature Algorithms
This section specifies the conventions employed by CMP
implementations that support DSA, RSA, or ECDSA.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
The signature algorithm is referred to as MSG_SIG_ALG in RFC 4210
Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and in the Lightweight CMP Profile
[I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
Signature algorithm identifiers are located in the protectionAlg
field of PKIHeader, the algorithmIdentifier field of POPOSigningKey,
signatureAlgorithm field of p10cr, SignKeyPairTypes, and the
SignerInfo signatureAlgorithm field of SignedData.
Signature values are located in the protection field of PKIMessage,
signature field of POPOSigningKey, signature field of p10cr, and
SignerInfo signature field of SignedData.
3.1. DSA
The DSA signature algorithm is defined in FIPS Pub 186-4 [FIPS186-4]
and MAY be used with SHA-224 and SHA-256 as specified in RFC 5754
[RFC5754].
The algorithm identifiers for DSA with SHA2 signature values are:
id-dsa-with-sha224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-ccitt(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
algorithms(4) id-dsa-with-sha2(3) 1 }
id-dsa-with-sha256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-ccitt(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
algorithms(4) id-dsa-with-sha2(3) 2 }
Further conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 5754
Section 3.1 [RFC5754].
3.2. RSA
The RSA (RSASSA-PSS and RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5) signature algorithm is
defined in RFC 8017 [RFC8017]. RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 MAY be used with
SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, or SHA-512 as specified in RFC 5754
[RFC5754].
The algorithm identifiers for RSASAA-PSS signatures as specified in
RFC 4055 [RFC4055] is:
id-RSASSA-PSS OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 10 }
Further conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 4056
[RFC4056].
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
The algorithm identifiers for RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 signatures as
specified in RFC 4055 [RFC4055] are:
sha224WithRSAEncryption OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1)
member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 14 }
sha256WithRSAEncryption OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1)
member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 11 }
sha384WithRSAEncryption OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1)
member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 12 }
sha512WithRSAEncryption OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1)
member-body(2) us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 13 }
Further conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 5754
Section 3.2 [RFC5754].
3.3. ECDSA
The ECDSA signature algorithm is defined in FIPS Pub 186-4
[FIPS186-4] and MAY be used with SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, or
SHA-512 as specified in RFC 5754 [RFC5754].
The algorithm identifiers for ECDSA with SHA2 signature values are:
ecdsa-with-SHA224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) ansi-X9-62(10045) signatures(4) ecdsa-with-SHA2(3) 1 }
ecdsa-with-SHA256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) ansi-X9-62(10045) signatures(4) ecdsa-with-SHA2(3) 2 }
ecdsa-with-SHA384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) ansi-X9-62(10045) signatures(4) ecdsa-with-SHA2(3) 3 }
ecdsa-with-SHA512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) ansi-X9-62(10045) signatures(4) ecdsa-with-SHA2(3) 4 }
Further conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 5754
Section 3.3 [RFC5754].
4. Key Management Algorithms
CMP accommodates the following general key management techniques: key
agreement, key transport, and passwords.
CRMF [RFC4211] and CMP Updates [I-D.ietf-lamps-cmp-updates]
facilitate the use of CMS [RFC5652] EnvelopedData by deprecating the
use of EncryptedValue.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
4.1. Key Agreement Algorithms
The key agreement algorithm is referred to as PROT_ENC_ALG in
RFC 4210 Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and in the Lightweight CMP
Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
Key agreement algorithms are only used in CMP when using CMS
[RFC5652] EnvelopedData together with the key agreement key
management technique. When a key agreement algorithm is used, a key-
encryption algorithm (Section 4.3) is needed next to the content-
encryption algorithm (Section 5).
Key agreement algorithm identifiers are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos KeyAgreeRecipientInfo keyEncryptionAlgorithm fields.
Key encryption algorithm identifiers are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos KeyAgreeRecipientInfo keyEncryptionAlgorithm field.
Wrapped content-encryption keys are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos KeyAgreeRecipientInfo RecipientEncryptedKeys
encryptedKey field.
4.1.1. Diffie-Hellman
Diffie-Hellman key agreement is defined in RFC 2631 [RFC2631] and MAY
be used in the ephemeral-static or a static-static variant as
specified in RFC 3370 [RFC3370].
The Diffie-Hellman algorithm identifiers are:
id-alg-ESDH OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-9(9) smime(16) alg(3) 5 }
id-alg-SSDH OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-9(9) smime(16) alg(3) 10 }
Further conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 3370
Section 4.1 [RFC3370].
4.1.2. ECDH
Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH) key agreement is defined in
RFC 5753 [RFC5753] and MAY be used on the ephemeral-static variant in
RFC 5753 [RFC5753], the 1-Pass ECMQV variant as specified in RFC 5753
[RFC5753] or the static-static variant as specified in RFC RFC 6278
[RFC6278].
Algorithm Identifiers and further conventions to be considered are
specified in RFC RFC 5753 [RFC5753] and RFC 6278 [RFC6278].
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
4.2. Key Transport Algorithms
The key transport algorithm is also referred to as PROT_ENC_ALG in
RFC 4210 Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and in the Lightweight CMP
Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
Key transport algorithms are only used in CMP when using CMS
[RFC5652] EnvelopedData together with the key transport key
management technique.
Key transport algorithm identifiers are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos KeyTransRecipientInfo keyEncryptionAlgorithm field.
Key transport encrypted content-encryption keys are located in the
EnvelopedData RecipientInfos KeyTransRecipientInfo encryptedKey
field.
4.2.1. RSA
The RSA key transport algorithm is the RSA encryption scheme defined
in RFC 8017 [RFC8017].
The algorithm identifier for RSA (PKCS #1 v1.5) is:
rsaEncryption OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 1 }
The algorithm identifier for RSAES-OAEP is:
id-RSAES-OAEP OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-1(1) 7 }
Further conventions to be considered for PKCS #1 v1.5 are specified
in RFC 3370 Section 4.2.1 [RFC3370] and for RSAES-OAEP in RFC 3560
[RFC3560].
4.3. Symmetric Key-Encryption Algorithms
The symmetric key-encryption algorithm is also referred to as
PROT_SYM_ALG in RFC 4210 Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and in the
Lightweight CMP Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
As symmetric key-encryption key management technique is not used by
CMP, the symmetric key-encryption algorithm is only needed when using
the key agreement or password-based key management technique with CMS
[RFC5652] EnvelopedData.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
Key-encryption algorithm identifiers are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos KeyAgreeRecipientInfo keyEncryptionAlgorithm and
EnvelopedData RecipientInfos PassworRecipientInfo
keyEncryptionAlgorithm fields.
Wrapped content-encryption keys are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos KeyAgreeRecipientInfo RecipientEncryptedKeys
encryptedKey and EnvelopedData RecipientInfos PassworRecipientInfo
encryptedKey fields.
4.3.1. AES Key Wrap
The AES encryption algorithm is defined in FIBS Pub 197 [FIPS197] and
the key wrapping is defined in RFC 3394 [RFC3394].
AES key encryption has the algorithm identifier:
id-aes128-wrap OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 5 }
id-aes192-wrap OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 25 }
id-aes256-wrap OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 45 }
Further conventions to be considered for AES key wrap are specified
in RFC 3394 Section 2.2 [RFC3394] and RFC 3565 Section 2.3.2
[RFC3565].
4.4. Key Derivation Algorithms
Key derivation algorithms are only used in CMP when using CMS
[RFC5652] EnvelopedData together with password-based key management
technique.
Key derivation algorithm identifiers are located in the EnvelopedData
RecipientInfos PassworRecipientInfo keyDerivationAlgorithm field.
4.4.1. Password-based Key Derivation Function 2
The password-based key derivation function 2 (PBKDF2) is defined in
RFC 8018 [RFC8018].
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
Password-based key derivation function 2 has the algorithm
identifier:
id-PBKDF2 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2) us(840)
rsadsi(113549) pkcs(1) pkcs-5(5) 12 }
Further conventions to be considered for PBKDF2 are specified in
RFC 3370 Section 4.4.1 [RFC3370] and RFC 8018 Section 5.2 [RFC8018].
5. Content Encryption Algorithms
The content encryption algorithm is also referred to as PROT_SYM_ALG
in RFC 4210 Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and in the Lightweight CMP
Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
Content encryption algorithms are only used in CMP when using CMS
[RFC5652] EnvelopedData to transport a signed private key package in
case of central key generation or key archiving, a certificate to
facilitate implicit prove-of-possession, or a revocation passphrase
in encrypted form.
Content encryption algorithm identifiers are located in the
EnvelopedData EncryptedContentInfo contentEncryptionAlgorithmrithm
field.
Encrypted content is located in the EnvelopedData
EncryptedContentInfo encryptedContent field.
5.1. AES
The AES encryption algorithm is defined in FIPS Pub 197 [FIPS197].
Details of usage of AES-CCM and AES-GCM in CMS [RFC5652]
EnvelopedData is specified in RFC 5084 [RFC5084].
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
AES content encryption has the algorithm identifier:
id-aes128-CCM OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 7 }
id-aes192-CCM OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 27 }
id-aes256-CCM OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 47 }
id-aes128-GCM OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 6 }
id-aes192-GCM OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 26 }
id-aes256-GCM OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { joint-iso-itu-t(2)
country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)
nistAlgorithm(4) aes(1) 46 }
Further conventions to be considered for AES content encryption are
specified in RFC 5084 [RFC5084].
6. Message Authentication Code Algorithms
The message authentication code algorithm is also referred to as
MSG_MAC_ALG in RFC 4210 Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and in the
Lightweight CMP Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
Message authentication code algorithm identifiers are located in the
mac field of PBMParameter and DHBMParameter, the PBKDF2-params prf
field.
Message authentication code values are located in the EnvelopedData
EncryptedContentInfo encryptedContent field.
6.1. Password-based MAC
The password-based MAC is defined in RFC 4210 [RFC4210].
The algorithm identifier for password-based MAC as specified in
RFC 4210 [RFC4210] is:
id-PasswordBasedMac OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) nt(113533) nsn(7) algorithms(66) 13 }
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
Further conventions to be considered for password-based MAC are
specified in RFC 4210 Section 5.1.3.1 [RFC4210].
6.2. Diffie-Hellman-based MAC
The Diffie-Hellman-based MAC is defined in RFC 4210 [RFC4210].
The algorithm identifiers for Diffie-Hellman-based MAC is:
id-DHBasedMac OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) nt(113533) nsn(7) algorithms(66) 30 }
Further conventions to be considered for Diffie-Hellman-based MAC are
specified in RFC 4210 Section 5.1.3.2 [RFC4210].
6.3. SHA2-based HMAC
The HMAC is defined in RFC 2104 [RFC2104] and FIPS Pub 198-1
[FIPS198-1]. The SHA2 algorithms are defined in
Section 2.1Section 2.1 and FIPS Pub 180-4 [FIPS180-4].
The algorithm identifiers for SHA2-based HMAC as specified in
RFC 4231 [RFC4231] are:
id-hmacWithSHA224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) digestAlgorithm(2) 8 }
id-hmacWithSHA256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) digestAlgorithm(2) 9 }
id-hmacWithSHA384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) digestAlgorithm(2) 10 }
id-hmacWithSHA512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso(1) member-body(2)
us(840) rsadsi(113549) digestAlgorithm(2) 11 }
Further conventions to be considered for SHA2-based HMAC are
specified in RFC 4231 Section 3.1 [RFC4231].
7. IANA Considerations
This document does not request changes to the IANA registry.
8. Security Considerations
RFC 4210 Appendix D.2 [RFC4210] contains a set of algorithms,
mandatory to be supported by conforming implementations. Theses
algorithms were appropriate at the time CMP war releases, but as
cryptographic algorithms weaken over time, some of them should not be
uses anymore. In general, new attacks are emerging due to research
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
cryptoanalysis or increase in computing power. new algorithms were
introduced that are more resistant to today's attacks.
This document lists many cryptographic algorithms usable with CMP to
offer implementers a more up to date choice. Finally, the algorithms
to be supported also heavily depend on the utilizes certificates in
the target environment.
In the appendix of this document there is also an update to the
Appendix D.2 of RFC 4210 [RFC4210] and a set of algorithms to be
supported when implementing the Lightweight CMP Profile
[I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
To keep the list of algorithms to be used with CMP up to date to
enlist secure algorithms resisting known attack scenarios, future
algorithms should be added and weakened algorithms should be
deprecated.
9. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Russ Housley for his input and feedback to this document.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[FIPS180-4]
NIST, "FIPS Pub 180-4: Secure Hash Standard (SHA)", August
2015 , <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.180-4.pdf>.
[FIPS186-4]
NIST, "FIPS Pub 186-4: Digital Signature Standard (DSS)",
July 2013, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.186-4.pdf>.
[FIPS197] NIST, "FIPS Pub 197: Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)",
November 2001, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.197.pdf>.
[FIPS198-1]
NIST, "The Keyed-Hash Message Authentication Code (HMAC)",
July 2008, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.198-1.pdf>.
[I-D.ietf-lamps-cmp-updates]
Brockhaus, H., "CMP Updates", draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-
updates-05 (work in progress), September 2020.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
[RFC2104] Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-
Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2104, February 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2104>.
[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>.
[RFC2631] Rescorla, E., "Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method",
RFC 2631, DOI 10.17487/RFC2631, June 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2631>.
[RFC3370] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Algorithms", RFC 3370, DOI 10.17487/RFC3370, August 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3370>.
[RFC3394] Schaad, J. and R. Housley, "Advanced Encryption Standard
(AES) Key Wrap Algorithm", RFC 3394, DOI 10.17487/RFC3394,
September 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3394>.
[RFC3560] Housley, R., "Use of the RSAES-OAEP Key Transport
Algorithm in Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)",
RFC 3560, DOI 10.17487/RFC3560, July 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3560>.
[RFC3565] Schaad, J., "Use of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
Encryption Algorithm in Cryptographic Message Syntax
(CMS)", RFC 3565, DOI 10.17487/RFC3565, July 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3565>.
[RFC4055] Schaad, J., Kaliski, B., and R. Housley, "Additional
Algorithms and Identifiers for RSA Cryptography for use in
the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate
and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 4055,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4055, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4055>.
[RFC4056] Schaad, J., "Use of the RSASSA-PSS Signature Algorithm in
Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", RFC 4056,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4056, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4056>.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
[RFC4210] Adams, C., Farrell, S., Kause, T., and T. Mononen,
"Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate
Management Protocol (CMP)", RFC 4210,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4210, September 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4210>.
[RFC4211] Schaad, J., "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure
Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF)", RFC 4211,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4211, September 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4211>.
[RFC4231] Nystrom, M., "Identifiers and Test Vectors for HMAC-SHA-
224, HMAC-SHA-256, HMAC-SHA-384, and HMAC-SHA-512",
RFC 4231, DOI 10.17487/RFC4231, December 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4231>.
[RFC5084] Housley, R., "Using AES-CCM and AES-GCM Authenticated
Encryption in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)",
RFC 5084, DOI 10.17487/RFC5084, November 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5084>.
[RFC5652] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", STD 70,
RFC 5652, DOI 10.17487/RFC5652, September 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5652>.
[RFC5753] Turner, S. and D. Brown, "Use of Elliptic Curve
Cryptography (ECC) Algorithms in Cryptographic Message
Syntax (CMS)", RFC 5753, DOI 10.17487/RFC5753, January
2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5753>.
[RFC5754] Turner, S., "Using SHA2 Algorithms with Cryptographic
Message Syntax", RFC 5754, DOI 10.17487/RFC5754, January
2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5754>.
[RFC6278] Herzog, J. and R. Khazan, "Use of Static-Static Elliptic
Curve Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement in Cryptographic
Message Syntax", RFC 6278, DOI 10.17487/RFC6278, June
2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6278>.
[RFC8017] Moriarty, K., Ed., Kaliski, B., Jonsson, J., and A. Rusch,
"PKCS #1: RSA Cryptography Specifications Version 2.2",
RFC 8017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8017, November 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8017>.
[RFC8018] Moriarty, K., Ed., Kaliski, B., and A. Rusch, "PKCS #5:
Password-Based Cryptography Specification Version 2.1",
RFC 8018, DOI 10.17487/RFC8018, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8018>.
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
10.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile]
Brockhaus, H., Fries, S., and D. Oheimb, "Lightweight CMP
Profile", draft-ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile-03
(work in progress), October 2020.
Appendix A. Algorithm Use Profiles
This appendix provides profiles of algorithms and respective
conventions for different application use cases.
A.1. Algorithm Profile for PKI Management Message Profiles
The following table contains definitions of algorithm used within PKI
Management Message Profiles as defined in CMP Appendix D.2 [RFC4210].
The columns in the table are:
Name: an identifier used for message profiles
Use: description of where and for what the algorithm is used
Mandatory: an AlgorithmIdentifier which MUST be supported by
conforming implementations
Name Use Mandatory
------------ --------------------------------------- ----------------
MSG_SIG_ALG protection of PKI messages using RSA
signature
MSG_MAC_ALG protection of PKI messages using MACing PasswordBasedMac
SYM_PENC_ALG symmetric encryption of an end entity's AES-wrap
private key where symmetric key is
distributed out-of-band
PROT_ENC_ALG asymmetric algorithm used for D-H
encryption of (symmetric keys for
encryption of) private keys transported
in PKIMessages
PROT_SYM_ALG symmetric encryption algorithm used for AES
encryption of private key bits (a key
of this type is encrypted using
PROT_ENC_ALG)
Mandatory Algorithm Identifiers and Specifications:
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
RSA: sha256WithRSAEncryption with 2048 bit, see Section 3.2
PasswordBasedMac: id-PasswordBasedMac, see Section 6.1 (with id-
sha256 as the owf parameter, see Section 2.1 and id-hmacWithSHA256 as
the mac parameter, see Section 6.3)
D-H: id-alg-ESDH, see Section 4.1.1
AES-wrap: id-aes256-wrap, see Section 4.3.1
AES: id-aes256-GCM, see Section 5.1
A.2. Algorithm Profile for Lightweight CMP Profile
The following table contains definitions of algorithm which MUST be
supported by conforming implementations This profile is referenced in
the Lightweight CMP Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile].
The columns in the table are:
Name: an identifier used for message profiles
Use: description of where and for what the algorithm is used
Mandatory: an AlgorithmIdentifier which MUST be supported by
conforming implementations
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
Name Use Mandatory
------------ --------------------------------------- ----------------
MSG_SIG_ALG protection of PKI messages using ECDSA
signature
MSG_MAC_ALG protection of PKI messages using MACing PasswordBasedMac
KM_KA_ALG asymmetric key agreement algorithm used ECDH
for agreement of a symmetric keys for
encryption of EnvelopedData, e.g., a
private key transported in PKIMessages
KM_KT_ALG asymmetric key encryption algorithm RSA
used for transport of a symmetric keys
for encryption of EnvelopedData, e.g.,
a private key transported in
PKIMessages
KM_PB_ALG symmetric derivation algorithm used to PBKDF2
derive a symmetric key for encryption
of EnvelopedData, e.g., a private key
transported in PKIMessages, from a
password
PROT_ENC_ALG Symmetric key encryption algorithm to AES-wrap
encrypt a content encryption key
PROT_SYM_ALG symmetric content encryption algorithm AES
used for encryption of, e.g., private
key bits (a key of this type is
encrypted using PROT_ENC_ALG)
Mandatory Algorithm Identifiers and Specifications:
< TBD: The list of mandatory algorithms has to be defined later. >
Appendix B. History of changes
Note: This appendix will be deleted in the final version of the
document.
From version 00 -> 01:
o Changed sections Symmetric Key-Encryption Algorithms and Content
Encryption Algorithms based on the discussion on the mailing list
(see thread "[CMP Algorithms] Use Key-Wrap with or without padding
in Section 4.3 and Section 5")
o Added Appendix A with updated algorithms profile for RDC4210
Appendix D.2 and first proposal for the Lightweight CMP Profile
o Minor changes in wording
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft CMP Algorithms November 2020
Author's Address
Hendrik Brockhaus
Siemens AG
Email: hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.com
Brockhaus Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 18]