Network Working Group J. Vinocur Internet Draft Cornell University Document: draft-ietf-nntpext-authinfo-02.txt C. Newman Sun Microsystems K. Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd. July 2004 NNTP Extension for Authentication Status of this memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026. 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. Abstract This document defines a profile of the Simple Authentication and Security Layer [SASL] for the Network News Transport Protocol [NNTP] protocol and updates/deprecates information contained in Section 3.1 of [NNTP-COMMON]. This extension allows an NNTP client to indicate an authentication mechanism to the server, perform an authentication protocol exchange, and optionally negotiate a secu- rity layer for subsequent protocol interactions during the Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 1]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 remainder of an NNTP session. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................. 2 1.1. Conventions Used in this Document ................... 3 2. The AUTHINFO Extension ................................... 3 2.1. AUTHINFO USER/PASS .................................. 5 2.1.1. Usage .......................................... 6 2.1.2. Description .................................... 6 2.1.3. Examples ....................................... 7 2.2. AUTHINFO SASL ....................................... 8 2.2.1. Usage .......................................... 8 2.2.2. Description .................................... 8 2.2.3. Examples ....................................... 11 3. Augmented BNF Syntax for the AUTHINFO Extension .......... 13 3.1. Commands ............................................ 14 3.2. Command Continuation ................................ 14 3.3. Responses ........................................... 14 3.4. LIST EXTENSIONS responses ........................... 14 3.5. General non-terminals ............................... 15 4. Summary of Response Codes ................................ 15 5. Authentication Tracking/Logging .......................... 15 6. Security Considerations .................................. 16 7. IANA Considerations ...................................... 16 7.1. IANA Considerations for SASL/GSSAPI services ........ 16 7.2. IANA Considerations for NNTP extensions ............. 17 8. References ............................................... 18 8.1. Normative References ................................ 18 8.2. Informative References .............................. 19 9. Authors' Addresses ....................................... 19 10. Acknowledgments ......................................... 20 11. Intellectual Property Rights ............................ 20 12. Copyright ............................................... 20 1. Introduction Although NNTP [NNTP] has traditionally provided public access to newsgroups, authentication is often useful, for example to control resource consumption, to allow abusers of the POST command to be identified, and to restrict access to "local" newsgroups. The ad-hoc AUTHINFO USER and AUTHINFO PASS commands, documented in [NNTP-COMMON], provide a very weak authentication mechanism in widespread use by the installed base. Due to their insecurity and ubiquity they are formalized in this specification, but only for use in combination with appropriate security layers. Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 2]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 The ad-hoc AUTHINFO GENERIC command, also documented in [NNTP-COM- MON] but much less ubiquitous, provided an NNTP-specific equivalent of the generic SASL [SASL] facility. This document deprecates AUTHINFO GENERIC in favor of an AUTHINFO SASL replacement so that NNTP can benefit from authentication mechanisms developed for other SASL-enabled application protocols including SMTP, POP, IMAP, LDAP, and BEEP. This specification is to be read in conjunction with the NNTP base specification [NNTP]. Except where specifically stated otherwise, in the case of a conflict between these two documents [NNTP] takes precedence over this one. It is also recommended that this specification be read in conjunc- tion with the SASL base specification [SASL]. 1.1. Conventions Used in this Document The notational conventions used in this document are the same as those in [NNTP] and any term not defined in this document has the same meaning as in that one. The key words "REQUIRED", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels" [KEYWORDS]. Terms related to authentication are defined in "On Internet Authen- tication" [AUTH]. In the examples, commands from the client are indicated with [C], and responses from the server are indicated with [S]. 2. The AUTHINFO Extension A server MAY provide this extension, independently of any other extension defined elsewhere. If the server provides the extension, it MUST include the AUTHINFO extension label in the response to LIST EXTENSIONS. If it does not provide it, it MUST NOT include the extension label. The remainder of this specification is written as if the extension is provided. This extension provides three new commands: AUTHINFO USER, AUTHINFO PASS, and AUTHINFO SASL. At least one of the AUTHINFO USER or AUTHINFO SASL commands MUST be implemented in order to advertise the AUTHINFO extension label. The AUTHINFO extension label con- tains an argument list detailing which authentication commands are available. Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 3]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 The "USER" argument indicates that AUTHINFO USER/PASS is supported as defined by Section 2.1 of this document. The "USER" argument MUST NOT be advertised, and the AUTHINFO USER/PASS commands SHOULD NOT be provided, unless a strong encryption layer (e.g. TLS [NNTP- TLS]) is in use or backward compatibility dictates otherwise. The "SASL:" argument indicates that AUTHINFO SASL is supported as defined by Section 2.2 of this document. The "SASL:" argument is followed immediately (no intervening whitespace) by a comma-sepa- rated list of available SASL mechanism names, and the colon (":") is always included even if no mechanisms are available. The server may list the AUTHINFO capability with no arguments, which indicates that it complies with this draft and does not per- mit any authentication commands in its current state. In this case, the client MUST NOT attempt to utilize any AUTHINFO commands, even if it contains logic to do so (e.g. for backward compatibility with servers that are not compliant with this specification). Future extensions may add additional arguments to this capability. Unrecognized arguments SHOULD be ignored or brought to the atten- tion of the user. Example: [C] LIST EXTENSIONS [S] 202 Extensions supported: [S] STARTTLS [S] AUTHINFO SASL:CRAM-MD5,DIGEST-MD5,GSSAPI [S] . [C] STARTTLS [S] 382 Continue with TLS negotiation [TLS negotiation proceeds, further commands protected by TLS layer] [C] LIST EXTENSIONS [S] 202 Extensions supported: [S] AUTHINFO USER SASL:CRAM-MD5,DIGEST-MD5,GSSAPI,PLAIN,EXTERNAL [S] . The AUTHINFO extension is used to authenticate a user. Note that authorization is a matter of site policy, not network protocol, and is therefore not discussed in this document. The server determines authorization in whatever manner is defined by its implementation as configured by the site administrator. When an NNTP server responds to a client command with a 480 response, this indicates the client MUST authenticate using the AUTHINFO command in order to use that command or access the indi- cated resource. A client intending to use AUTHINFO may issue the LIST EXTENSIONS command to obtain the available authentication Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 4]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 commands and mechanisms before attempting authentication. A client MAY attempt the first step of authentication at any time during a session to acquire additional privileges without having received a 480 response. The client MUST NOT under any circum- stances continue with any steps of authentication beyond the first, unless the response code from the server indicates that the authen- tication exchange is welcomed. In particular, anything other than a 38x response code indicates that the client MUST NOT continue the authentication exchange. Servers are not required to accept unsolicited authentication information from the client, therefore clients MUST accommodate servers that reject such authentication information. Additionally, servers may accept authentication information and yet still deny access to some or all resources; the permanent 502 response indi- cates a resource is unavailable even though authentication has been performed (this is in contrast to the temporary 480 error indicat- ing that a resource is unavailable now but may become available after authentication). After a successful authentication, the client may retry the origi- nal command (if any) to which the server replied with the 480 response, or continue with some other command (for example, the client may wish to re-fetch the list of newsgroups). After an AUTHINFO command has been successfully completed, no more AUTHINFO commands may be issued in the same session. After a suc- cessful AUTHINFO command completes, a server MUST reject any fur- ther AUTHINFO commands with a 502 response. A server MUST NOT under any circumstances reply to an AUTHINFO com- mand with a 480 response. Note that a successful AUTHINFO command may cause the output of the LIST EXTENSIONS command to change. Any successful authentication MAY result in the server listing different arguments (perhaps list- ing zero arguments) for AUTHINFO, but MUST NOT result in the AUTHINFO capability being removed entirely from LIST EXTENSIONS (as this might falsely indicate to clients that they were dealing with a non-compliant server). Additionally, after a successful AUTHINFO SASL, the SASL: capability MUST continue to be advertised as described in section 2.2.2. 2.1. AUTHINFO USER/PASS This section supersedes the definition of the AUTHINFO USER and AUTHINFO PASS commands as documented in Section 3.1.1 of [NNTP- Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 5]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 COMMON]. These commands MUST NOT be pipelined. 2.1.1. Usage Syntax AUTHINFO USER username AUTHINFO PASS password Responses 281 Authentication accepted 381 Password required [1] 481 Authentication failed/rejected 482 Authentication commands issued out of sequence [1] Only valid for AUTHINFO USER. Note that unlike traditional 3xx codes which indicate that the client may continue the current com- mand, the legacy 381 code means that the AUTHINFO PASS command must be used to complete the authentication exchange. Parameters username = UTF-8 string identifying the user/client password = UTF-8 string representing the user's password 2.1.2. Description The AUTHINFO USER and AUTHINFO PASS commands are used to present clear text credentials to the server. These credentials consist of a username or a username plus a password (the distinction is that a password is expected to be kept secret while a username is not; this does not directly affect the protocol but may have an impact on user interfaces). The username is supplied through the AUTHINFO USER command and the password through the AUTHINFO PASS command. If the server requires only a username, it MUST NOT give a 381 response to AUTHINFO USER and MUST give a 482 response to AUTHINFO PASS. If the server requires both username and password, the former MUST be sent before the latter. The server will need to cache the user- name until the password is received; it MAY require the password to be sent in the immediately next command (in other words, only caching the username until the next command is sent). The server: - MUST return a 381 response to AUTHINFO USER; - MUST return a 482 response to AUTHINFO PASS if there is no cached username; Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 6]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 - MUST use the argument of the most recent AUTHINFO USER for authentication; - MUST NOT return a 381 response to AUTHINFO PASS. The server MAY determine whether or not a password is needed based on the username. Thus the same server can respond with both 381 and other response codes to AUTHINFO USER. The AUTHINFO PASS command permits the client to use a clear-text password to authenticate. A compliant implementation MUST NOT implement this mechanism without also implementing support for TLS [NNTP-TLS]. Use of this mechanism without an active strong encryp- tion layer is deprecated as it exposes the user's password to all parties on the network between the client and the server. Any implementation of this mechanism SHOULD be configurable to disable it unless a strong encryption layer such as that provided by [NNTP- TLS] is active, and this configuration SHOULD be the default. The server will use the 483 response code to indicate that the datastream is insufficiently secure for the command being attempted. Usernames and passwords MUST use the UTF-8 [UTF-8] character set and client MUST convert any user input to UTF-8 if necessary. Note that usernames and passwords containing whitespace are allowed, but may not work correctly with servers which blindly split command arguments at whitespace. A client may wish to scan the username and password for whitespace, and if detected, warn the user of the likelihood of problems. The SASL PLAIN [PLAIN] mecha- nism is recommended as an alternative, as it is more robust with regard to character set. 2.1.3. Examples Example of successful AUTHINFO USER: [C] AUTHINFO USER wilma [S] 281 Authentication accepted Example of successful AUTHINFO USER/PASS: [C] AUTHINFO USER fred [S] 381 Enter passphrase [C] AUTHINFO PASS flintstone [S] 281 Authentication accepted Example of AUTHINFO USER/PASS requiring a security layer: Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 7]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 [C] AUTHINFO USER fred@stonecanyon.example [S] 483 Encryption or stronger authentication required Example of failed AUTHINFO USER/PASS: [C] AUTHINFO USER barney [S] 381 Enter passphrase [C] AUTHINFO PASS flintstone [S] 481 Authentication failed Example of AUTHINFO PASS before AUTHINFO USER: [C] AUTHINFO PASS flintstone [S] 482 Authentication commands issued out of sequence 2.2. AUTHINFO SASL 2.2.1. Usage This command MUST NOT be pipelined. Syntax AUTHINFO SASL mechanism [initial-response] Responses 281 Authentication accepted 283 challenge Authentication accepted (with success data) [1] 383 challenge Continue with SASL exchange [1] 481 Authentication failed/rejected 482 SASL protocol error [1] These responses MAY exceed 512 octets. The maximum length of these responses is increased to that which can accommodate the largest encoded challenge possible for any of the SASL mechanisms supported by the implementation. Parameters mechanism = String identifying a [SASL] authentication mechanism. initial-response = Optional initial client response. If present, the response MUST be encoded as specified in Section 3 of [BASE64]. challenge = Server challenge. The challenge MUST be encoded as specified in Section 3 of [BASE64]. 2.2.2. Description Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 8]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 This section deprecates the definition of the AUTHINFO GENERIC com- mand as documented in Section 3.1.3 of [NNTP-COMMON]. (An imple- mentation MAY support AUTHINFO GENERIC for backward compatibility and still be compliant with this specification. However, this doc- ument does not provide a formal specification of AUTHINFO GENERIC, and does not permit it to be reported in LIST EXTENSIONS.) The AUTHINFO SASL command initiates a [SASL] authentication exchange between the client and the server. The client identifies the SASL mechanism to use with the first parameter of the AUTHINFO SASL command. If the server supports the requested authentication mechanism, it performs the SASL exchange to authenticate the user. Optionally, it also negotiates a security layer for subsequent pro- tocol interactions during this session. If the requested authenti- cation mechanism is invalid (e.g. is not supported), the server rejects the AUTHINFO SASL command with a 501 reply. If the requested authentication mechanism requires an encryption layer, the server rejects the AUTHINFO SASL command with a 483 reply. The SASL authentication exchange consists of a series of server challenges and client responses that are specific to the chosen [SASL] mechanism. A server challenge is sent as a 383 reply with a single argument containing the [BASE64] encoded string supplied by the SASL mecha- nism. If the server challenge has zero length, it MUST instead be sent as a single equals sign ("="), to indicate its presence and separate it from any trailing text. A client response consists of a line containing a [BASE64] encoded string. If the client response has zero length, it MUST instead be sent as a single equals sign ("="). If the client wishes to cancel the authentication exchange, it issues a line with a single "*". If the server receives such a response, it MUST reject the AUTHINFO SASL command by sending a 481 reply. Note that these [BASE64] strings can be much longer than normal NNTP responses. Clients and servers MUST be able to handle the maximum encoded size of challenges and responses generated by their supported authentication mechanisms. This requirement is indepen- dent of any line length limitations the client or server may have in other parts of its protocol implementation. The optional initial response argument to the AUTHINFO SASL command is used to save a round trip when using authentication mechanisms that support an initial client response. If the initial response argument is omitted and the chosen mechanism requires an initial client response, the server MUST proceed as defined in section 5.1 Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 9]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 of [SASL]. In NNTP, a server challenge that contains no data is defined to be the same as a zero-length challenge as described above. Note that the AUTHINFO SASL command is still subject to the line length limitations defined in [NNTP]. If use of the initial response argument would cause the AUTHINFO SASL command to exceed this length, the client MUST NOT use the initial response parameter (and instead proceed as defined in section 5.1 of [SASL]). If the client is transmitting an initial response of zero length, it MUST instead transmit the response as a single equals sign ("="). This indicates that the response is present, but contains no data. If the client uses an initial-response argument to the AUTHINFO SASL command with a SASL mechanism that does not support an initial client send, the server MUST reject the AUTHINFO SASL command with a 482 reply. If the server cannot [BASE64] decode any client response, it MUST reject the AUTHINFO SASL command with a 504 reply. If the client cannot BASE64 decode any of the server's challenges, it MUST cancel the authentication using the "*" response. In particular, servers and clients MUST reject (and not ignore) any character not explic- itly allowed by the BASE64 alphabet, and MUST reject any sequence of BASE64 characters that contains the pad character ('=') anywhere other than the end of the string (e.g. "=AAA" and "AAA=BBB" are not allowed). The authorization identity generated by this [SASL] exchange is a simple username, and both client and server MUST use the [SASLprep] profile of the [StringPrep] algorithm to prepare these names for transmission or comparison. If preparation of the authorization identity fails or results in an empty string (unless it was trans- mitted as the empty string), the server MUST fail the authentica- tion with a 481 reply. Should the client successfully complete the exchange, the server issues either a 283 or 281 reply. If the server is unable to authenticate the client, it MUST reject the AUTHINFO SASL command with a 481 reply. If an AUTHINFO command fails, the client MAY proceed without authentication. Alternatively, the client MAY try another authentication mechanism or present different credentials by issuing another AUTHINFO command. If the SASL mechanism returns additional data on success (e.g. server authentication), the NNTP server issues a 283 reply with a Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 10]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 single argument containing the [BASE64] encoded string supplied by the SASL mechanism. If no additional data is returned on success, the server issues a 281 reply. If a security layer is negotiated during the SASL exchange, it takes effect for the client on the octet immediately following the CRLF that concludes the last response generated by the client. For the server, it takes effect immediately following the CRLF of its success reply. When a security layer takes effect, the server MUST discard any knowledge obtained from the client that was not obtained from the SASL negotiation itself. Likewise, the client MUST discard any knowledge obtained from the server, such as the list of NNTP exten- sions, that was not obtained from the SASL negotiation itself. (Note that a client MAY compare the advertised SASL mechanisms before and after authentication in order to detect an active down- negotiation attack.) After a security layer is established, the server MUST continue to advertise the AUTHINFO capability and "SASL:" argument (with the same mechanism list as before authentication) and SHOULD NOT adver- tise the STARTTLS [NNTP-TLS] capability (as STARTTLS is not allowed after authentication). When both TLS [NNTP-TLS] and SASL security layers are in effect, the TLS encoding MUST be applied after the SASL encoding. To ensure interoperability, client and server implementations of this extension MUST implement the [DIGEST-MD5] SASL mechanism. If AUTHINFO USER/PASS and AUTHINFO SASL are both implemented, the SASL [PLAIN] mechanism SHOULD also be implemented, as the function- ality of DIGEST-MD5 is insufficient for some environments (e.g. the server may need to pass the raw password off to an external authen- tication service). The SASL PLAIN mechanism is preferred over AUTHINFO USER, even if there is not a strong encryption layer active, because it eliminates limitations that AUTHINFO USER/PASS has on the character set used for usernames and passwords. The service name specified by this protocol's profile of SASL is "nntp". 2.2.3. Examples Example of the [PLAIN] SASL mechanism under a TLS layer, using an initial client response: Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 11]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 [C] LIST EXTENSIONS [S] 202 Extensions supported: [S] STARTTLS [S] AUTHINFO SASL:CRAM-MD5,DIGEST-MD5,GSSAPI [S] . [C] STARTTLS [S] 382 Continue with TLS negotiation [TLS negotiation proceeds, further commands protected by TLS layer] [C] LIST EXTENSIONS [S] 202 Extensions supported: [S] AUTHINFO USER SASL:CRAM-MD5,DIGEST-MD5,GSSAPI,PLAIN,EXTERNAL [S] . [C] AUTHINFO SASL PLAIN AHRlc3QAMTIzNA== [S] 281 Authentication accepted Example of the EXTERNAL SASL mechanism under a TLS layer, using the derived authorization ID, and thus a zero-length initial client response (commands prior to AUTHINFO SASL are the same as the pre- vious example and have been omitted): [C] AUTHINFO SASL EXTERNAL = [S] 281 Authentication accepted Example of the [DIGEST-MD5] SASL mechanism, which includes a server challenge and server success data (whitespace has been inserted for clarity; base64-encoded data is sent as a single line with no embedded whitespace): [C] AUTHINFO SASL DIGEST-MD5 [S] 383 bm9uY2U9IlBKUE9GczJKa05VYWhraDNjRmVUN2dZZjFKY0VJakVCSHRK NzFycmNDMTg9IixyZWFsbT0iZWFnbGUub2NlYW5hLmNvbSIscW9wPSJhdXRo IixtYXhidWY9NDA5NixjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04LGFsZ29yaXRobT1tZDUtc2Vz cw== [C] dXNlcm5hbWU9InRlc3QiLHJlYWxtPSJlYWdsZS5vY2VhbmEuY29tIixub25j ZT0iUEpQT0ZzMkprTlVhaGtoM2NGZVQ3Z1lmMUpjRUlqRUJIdEo3MXJyY0Mx OD0iLGNub25jZT0iUmVkV2VqM3JNdFY5U09XSE5BNUVtZFNmVWRFajNCMlpL YTNIeFlHbzJCWT0iLG5jPTAwMDAwMDAxLHFvcD1hdXRoLG1heGJ1Zj0xMDI0 LGRpZ2VzdC11cmk9Im5ld3MvbG9jYWxob3N0IixyZXNwb25zZT0zOTg2NWIy NTk0Nzk4ZjY4ZmY5ZWEwNDg1NGE2NGQ1ZQ== [S] 283 cnNwYXV0aD0xYzc0NjdmMTY0OTQ3NmM4ZDJjNzM5ZTY4MjgwMzE2OA== Example of a failed authentication due to bad [GSSAPI] credentials. Note that while the mechanism can utilize the initial response, the client does not send it because of the limitation on command lengths, resulting in a zero-length server challenge (here whites- pace has been inserted for clarity; base64-encoded data is sent as a single line with no embedded whitespace): Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 12]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 [C] AUTHINFO SASL GSSAPI [S] 383 = [C] YIICOAYJKoZIhvcSAQICAQBuggInMIICI6ADAgEFoQMCAQ6iBwMFACAAAACj ggE/YYIBOzCCATegAwIBBaEYGxZURVNULk5FVC5JU0MuVVBFTk4uRURVoiQw IqADAgEDoRswGRsEbmV3cxsRbmV0bmV3cy51cGVubi5lZHWjge8wgeygAwIB EKEDAgECooHfBIHcSQfLKC8vm2i17EXmomwk6hHvjBY/BnKnvvDTrbno3198 vlX2RSUt+CjuAKhcDcj4DW0gvZEqH7t5v9yWedzztlpaThebBat6hQNr9NJP ozh1/+74HUwhGWb50KtjuftO/ftQ8q0nTuYKgIq6PM4tp2ddo1IfpjfdNR9E 95GFi3y1uBT7lQOwtQbRJUjPSO3ijdue9V7cNNVmYsBsqNsaHhvlBJEXf4WJ djH8yG+Dw/gX8fUTtC5fDpB5zLt01mkSXh6Wc4UhqQtwZBI2t/+TpX1okbg6 Hr1ZZupeH6SByjCBx6ADAgEQooG/BIG8GnCmcXWtqhXh48dGTLHQgJ04K5Fj RMMq2qPSbiha9lq0osqR2KAnQA6LioWYxU+6yPKpBDSC5WOT441fUfkM8iAL kW3uNc+luFCGcnDsacrmoVU7Y6Akcp9m7Fm7orRc+TWSWPpBg3OR2oG3ATW0 0NAz8TT06VOLVxIMUTINKdYVI/Ja7f3sy+/N4LGkJqScCQOwlo5tfDWn/UQF iTWo5Zw435rH8pjy2smQCnqC14v3NMAWTu4j+dzHUNw= [S] 481 Authentication error Example of a client aborting in the midst of an exchange: [C] AUTHINFO SASL GSSAPI [S] 383 = [C] * [S] 481 Authentication aborted as requested Example of attempting to use a mechanism that is not supported by the server: [C] AUTHINFO SASL EXAMPLE [S] 501 Mechanism not recognized Example of attempting to use a mechanism that requires a security layer: [C] AUTHINFO SASL PLAIN [S] 483 Encryption or stronger authentication required Example of using an initial response with a mechanism that doesn't support it (server must start the exchange): [C] AUTHINFO SASL CRAM-MD5 AHRlc3QAMTIzNA== [S] 482 SASL protocol error 3. Augmented BNF Syntax for the AUTHINFO Extension This section describes the syntax of the AUTHINFO extension. It extends the syntax in [NNTP], and non-terminals not defined in this document are defined there. Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 13]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 3.1. Commands This syntax extends the non-terminal "command", which represents an NNTP command. command /= authinfo-user-command / authinfo-pass-command / authinfo-sasl-command authinfo-user-command = "AUTHINFO" WS "USER" WS username authinfo-pass-command = "AUTHINFO" WS "PASS" WS password authinfo-sasl-command = "AUTHINFO" WS "SASL" WS mechanism [WS initial-response] username = 1*(P-CHAR / SP / TAB) password = 1*(P-CHAR / SP / TAB) initial-response = base64-opt 3.2. Command Continuation This syntax extends the non-terminal "command-continuation", which represents the further material sent by the client in the case of multi-stage commands. command-continuation /= authinfo-sasl-continuation authinfo-sasl-continuation = ("*" / base64-opt) CRLF ; client must send a continuation following each ; "383" response from the server 3.3. Responses This syntax extends the non-terminal "simple-response-content" for the various commands in this specification. simple-response-content /= response-sasl-content response-sasl-content = "283" SP base64 / "383" SP base64-opt 3.4. LIST EXTENSIONS responses This syntax defines the specific LIST EXTENSIONS responses for the AUTHINFO extension. extension-descriptor /= authinfo-extension authinfo-extension = %x41.55.54.48.49.4E.46.4F ; "AUTHINFO" *(SPA authinfo-extension-arg) authinfo-extension-arg = "USER" / "SASL:" [mechanism *("," mechanism)] Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 14]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 3.5. General non-terminals mechanism = 1*20mech-char mech-char = UPPER / DIGIT / "-" / "_" ; mechanism names restricted to uppercase letters, ; digits, "-" and "_" base64-opt = "=" / base64 4. Summary of Response Codes This section contains a list of every new response code defined in this document, whether it is multi-line, which commands can gener- ate it, what arguments it has, and what its meaning is. Response code 281 Generated by: AUTHINFO USER, AUTHINFO PASS, AUTHINFO SASL Meaning: authentication accepted Response code 283 Generated by: AUTHINFO SASL 1 argument: challenge Meaning: authentication accepted (with success data) Response code 381 Generated by: AUTHINFO USER Meaning: password required via AUTHINFO PASS command. Note that this code is used for backwards compatibility and does not conform to the traditional use of 3xx codes. Response code 383 Generated by: AUTHINFO SASL 1 argument: challenge Meaning: continue with SASL exchange Response code 481 Generated by: AUTHINFO USER, AUTHINFO PASS, AUTHINFO SASL Meaning: authentication failed/rejected Response code 482 Generated by: AUTHINFO USER, AUTHINFO PASS, AUTHINFO SASL Meaning: authentication commands issued out of sequence or SASL protocol error 5. Authentication Tracking/Logging This section contains implementation suggestions and notes of best current practice, and does not specify further network protocol Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 15]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 requirements. Once authenticated, the authorization identity presented in the AUTHINFO exchange (username when using USER/PASS) SHOULD be included in an audit trail associating the identity with any arti- cles supplied during a POST operation, and this configuration SHOULD be the default. This may be accomplished, for example, by inserting headers in the posted articles, or by a server logging mechanism. The server MAY provide a facility for disabling the procedure described above, as some users or administrators may con- sider it a violation of privacy. 6. Security Considerations Security issues are discussed throughout this memo. Before the [SASL] negotiation has begun, any protocol interactions may have been performed in the clear and may have been modified by an active attacker. For this reason, clients and servers MUST dis- card any knowledge obtained prior to the start of the SASL negotia- tion upon the establishment of a security layer. Servers MAY implement a policy whereby the connection is dropped after a number of failed authentication attempts. If they do so, they SHOULD NOT drop the connection until at least 3 attempts at authentication have failed. Implementations MUST support a configuration where authentication mechanisms that are vulnerable to passive eavesdropping attacks (such as AUTHINFO USER/PASS and SASL [PLAIN]) are not advertised or used without the presence of an external security layer such as TLS [NNTP-TLS]. When multiple authentication mechanisms are permitted by both client and server, an active attacker can cause a down-negotiation to the weakest mechanism. For this reason, both clients and servers SHOULD be configurable to forbid use of weak mechanisms. 7. IANA Considerations 7.1. IANA Considerations for SASL/GSSAPI services Please register the SASL/GSSAPI service name "nntp". This service name refers to authenticated use of Usenet news service when pro- vided via the [NNTP] protocol. o Published Specification: This document. Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 16]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 o Author, Change Controller, and Contact for Further Information: Author of this document. 7.2. IANA Considerations for NNTP extensions Below is a formal definition of the AUTHINFO extension as required by Section 8 of [NNTP] for the IANA registry. o This extension provides an extensible mechanism for NNTP authen- tication via a variety of methods. o The extension-label is "AUTHINFO". o The extension-label has two possible optional arguments "USER" and "SASL:" (as defined in Section 2) indicating which variants of the AUTHINFO command are supported. o The extension defines three new commands, AUTHINFO USER, AUTHINFO PASS, and AUTHINFO SASL, whose behavior, arguments, and responses are defined in Section 2. o The extension does not associate any new responses with pre- existing NNTP commands. o The extension may affect the overall behavior of both server and client, in that the AUTHINFO SASL command requires that subse- quent communication to be transmitted via an intermediary secu- rity layer. o The extension does not affect the maximum length of commands or of initial response lines of pre-existing responses. o The extension defines two new responses, 283 and 383, whose lengths may exceed 512 octets. The maximum length of these responses is increased to that which can accommodate the largest encoded challenge possible for any of the SASL mechanisms sup- ported by the implementation. o The extension does not alter pipelining, but AUTHINFO commands cannot be pipelined. o Use of this extension may alter the output from LIST EXTENSIONS. Once any AUTHINFO command has been used successfully, the server may alter the list of arguments for the AUTHINFO capability (although the capability itself must still be listed, even with zero arguments). However, if a SASL security layer has been negotiated, the server SHOULD continue to advertise the "SASL:" argument with the same list of mechanisms, because the client Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 17]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 may wish to compare the pre- and post-authentication list of SASL mechanisms in order to detect active down-negotiation attacks. o The extension does not cause any pre-existing command to produce a 401, 480, or 483 response. o The AUTHINFO commands can be used before or after the MODE READER command, with the same semantics. o Published Specification: This document. o Author, Change Controller, and Contact for Further Information: Author of this document. 8. References 8.1. Normative References [ABNF] Crocker, D., Overell, P., "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. [AUTH] Haller, N., Atkinson, R., "On Internet Authentication", RFC 1704, Bell Communications Research, October 1994. [BASE64] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings", RFC 3548, July 2003. [DIGEST-MD5] Leach, P., Newman, C., "Using Digest Authentication as a SASL Mechanism", RFC 2831, May 2000. [KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, Harvard University, March 1997. [NNTP] Feather, C., "Network News Transport Protocol", draft-ietf-nntpext-base-*.txt, Work in Progress. [NNTP-TLS] Vinocur, J., "Using TLS with NNTP", draft-ietf-nntpext-tls-nntp-*.txt, Work in Progress. [SASL] Melnikov, A., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL)", draft-ietf-sasl-rfc2222bis-*.txt, Work in Progress. [SASLprep] Zeilega, K., "SASLprep: Stringprep profile for user names and passwords", draft-ietf-sasl-saslprep-*.txt, Work in Progress. [StringPrep] Hoffman, P. and Blanchet, M., "Preparation of Internationalized Strings ("stringprep")", Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 18]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 draft-hoffman-rfc3454bis-*.txt, Work in Progress. 8.2. Informative References [CRAM-MD5] Nerenberg, L., "The CRAM-MD5 SASL Mechanism", draft- ietf-sasl-crammd5-*.txt, Work in Progress. [GSSAPI] Melnikov, A., "SASL GSSAPI Mechanisms", draft-ietf-sasl- gssapi-*.txt, Work in Progress. [NNTP-COMMON] Barber, S., "Common NNTP Extensions", RFC 2980, Aca- dem Consulting Services, October 2000. [PLAIN] Zeilenga, K., "The Plain SASL Mechanism", draft-ietf-sasl- plain-*.txt, Work in Progress. [SMTP] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transport Protocol", RFC 2821, AT&T Laboratories, April 2001. [UTF-8] Yergeau, F. "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", RFC 3629, Alis Technologies, Novermber 2003. 9. Authors' Addresses Jeffrey M. Vinocur Department of Computer Science Upson Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 USA Email: vinocur@cs.cornell.edu Chris Newman Sun Microsystems 1050 Lakes Drive, Suite 250 West Covina, CA 91790 USA Email: cnewman@iplanet.com Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd. 21 Princeton Place Orchard Park, NY 14127 USA Email: ken@oceana.com Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 19]
Internet Draft NNTP Authentication July 2004 10. Acknowledgments A significant amount of the authentication text was originally from the NNTP revision or common authentication specs written by Stan Barber. A significant amount of the SASL text was lifted from the revisions to RFC 1734 and RFC 2554 by Rob Siemborski. Special acknowledgment also goes to Russ Allbery, Clive Feather, and others who commented privately on intermediate revisions of this document, as well as the members of the IETF NNTP Working Group for continual (yet sporadic) insight in discussion. 11. Intellectual Property Rights The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to per- tain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such pro- prietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Execu- tive Director. 12. Copyright Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is sub- ject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights." This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REP- RESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Vinocur, et. al. Expires January 2005 [Page 20]
