[Search] [txt|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 rfc2807                                           
XML Digital Signatures Working Group                    J. Reagle,
INTERNET-DRAFT                                             W3C/MIT
draft-ietf-xmldsig-requirements-00.txt
Expires December 23, 1999

                         XML-Signature Requirements

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 1999 The Internet Society & W3C (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All
   Rights Reserved.

IETF Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all
   provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   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 document is a production of the joint IETF/W3C XML Signature
   Working Group.

        http://www.w3.org/Signature

   The latest version of this draft series may be found at:

        http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/xmldsig-requirements

















Reagle                                                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft         XML-Signature Requirements       June 1999

XML-Signature Requirements
W3C Working Draft 1999-June-23

   This version:
          http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/xmldsig-requirements-990623 {ASCII}
          http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xmldsig-requirem
          ents-00.txt

   Latest version:
          http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/xmldsig-requirements

   Previous version:

          http://www.w3.org/Signatures/Drafts/xml-dsig-requirements-99060
          1

   Editor(s):
          Joseph Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>

   Copyright ยจ 1999 The Internet Society & W3C (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All
   Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software
   licensing rules apply.

W3C Status of this Document

   This is the first Public Working Draft of the IETF/W3C XML-Digital
   Signature Working Group Requirements document.  Its content is based
   on the Charter [Charter], XML-Signature Workshop [WS], Brown's IETF
   draft [Brown] and mailing list discussion. This draft will be
   published prior to the June 25 IETF deadline for consideration at the
   IETF in Oslo as an IETF-draft and W3C Working Draft. The first draft
   of a Working Group consensus version should be produced by July.

   This document does not necessarily represent the working group's
   consensus on a finished document; it also includes contrary positions
   (or alternative wordings) in order to elicit review and discussion.
   Positions which are potentially in conflict are specified as a list of
   lettered points. For example:
    1 Extensibility
         a. Position
         b. Alternative/Contrary Position

   Please send comments to the editor <reagle@w3.org> and cc: the list
   <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>. Publication as a Working Draft does not
   imply endorsement by the W3C membership. This is a draft document and
   may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time.
   It is inappropriate to cite W3C Drafts as other than "work in
   progress".A list of current W3C working drafts can be found at
   http://www.w3.org/TR. Publication as a Working Draft does not imply
   endorsement by the W3C membership.




Reagle                                                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft         XML-Signature Requirements       June 1999

Abstract

   This document lists the design principles, scope, and requirements for
   the XML Digital Signature specification.  It includes requirements as
   they relate to the signature syntax, data model, format, cryptographic
   porcessing, and external requirements and coordination.

Table of Contents

    1 Introduction
    2 Design Principles and Scope
    3 Requirements
         1 Signature Data Model and Syntax
         2 Format
         3 Cryptography
         4 Processing
         5 Coordination
    4 References
     _________________________________________________________________

1 Introduction

   The XML 1.0 Recommendation [XML] describes the syntax of a class of
   data objects called XML documents. The mission of this working group
   is to develop an XML compliant syntax used for representing signatures
   on Web resources and portions of protocol messages (anything that can
   be referenced by a URI) and procedures for computing and verifying
   such signatures. Signatures will provide data integrity,
   authentication, and/or non-repudiatability

2 Design Principles and Scope

    1 The XML-Signature specification will describe how to a digitally
       sign a Web resource in general, and an XML document in particular.
       [Charter] The specification will not specify methods of providing
       confidentiality though the Working Group may report on the
       feasibility of such work in a future or rechartered activity.
       [List(Bugbee)]
    2 The meaning of the signature is very simple:  The XML signature
       syntax associates the cryptographic signature value with Web
       resources using XML markup.
         1 The WG is not chartered to specify trust semantics, but
            syntax and processing rules necessary for communicating
            signature validity (authenticity, integrity and
            non-repudiation).  [Charter(Requirement1)]
         2 The XML signature syntax must be highly extensible such that
            it can support arbitrary application/trust semantics and
            assertion capabilities -- that can also be signed. For
            example, potential trust applications include sophisticated
            timestamps, endorsement, and threshold signature schemes. At
            the Chairs' discretion and in order to test the extensibility
            the syntax, the WG may produce non-standard-track proposals
            defining common semantics relevant to signed assertions about

Reagle                                                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft         XML-Signature Requirements       June 1999

            Web resources and their relationships in a schema definition
            (XML/RDF) or link type definition (XLink).
            [Charter(Requirement1&4), List(Bugbee, Solo)]
         3 Validity and Identity
              A. Only enough information necessary to check the validity
                 of the cryptographic signature need be provided.
                 [Reagle]
              B. Each signature shall be associated with information to
                 identify the signer and/or the cryptographic information
                 required to validate the signature.   [List(Solo)]
    3 An XML-Signature can apply to a part or totality of an XML
       document.  [Charter, Brown]
    4 More than one signature may exist over any resource.[Charter,
       Brown]
    5 A key use of XML Signatures will be detached Web signatures. In
       conjunction with XML facilities (including packaging) signatures
       may be embedded within or encapsulate XML or encoded content.
       [Charter]
    6 The Signature syntax specification will not specify methods of
       serialization or canonicalization. XML content is normalized by
       specifying an appropriate content C14N (canonicalization)
       algorithm [DOMHASH, C14N]; applications are expected to normalize
       application specific semantics prior to handing data to a
       XML-Signature application. [Charter]
    7 An XML-Signature application must be able to use and understand
         1 XML-namespaces [XML-namespaces] within its own signature
            syntax. Applications may optionally choose C14N algorithms
            which do or do not process namespaces within XML content.
         2 XLink [Xlink]. Applications will use XLink locators within
            the signature manifest to reference signed resources.
            Signature applications will not embed or expand XLink
            references in the signed content, though applications may
            optionally choose C14N algorithms which provide this feature.
         3 XML-Pointers [XPointer]. Applications will reference/select
            parts of XML documents using XML-Pointer within an XLink
            locator. [Reagle, WS-list(1)]
    8 Implementation/Design Philosophy
         A. XML Signatures will be developed as part of the broader Web
            design philosophy of decentralization, URIs, Web data
            [WebData], modularity/layering/extensibility, and assertions
            as statements about statements. [Reagle]
         B. The ability to leverage existing cryptographic provider (and
            infrastructure) primitives is desirable.  [List(Solo)]

3 Requirements

Signature Data Model and Syntax

    1 The XML-Signature data structures will be predicated on an RDF
       data model [RDF] but need not use the RDF serialization syntax.
       [Charter]
    2 XML-Signatures can be applied to any Web resource -- including
       non-XML content. XML-Signature referents are identified with XML

Reagle                                                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft         XML-Signature Requirements       June 1999

       locators (URIs or fragments) within the manifest that refer to
       external or internal resources (i.e., network accessible or within
       the same XML document/package). [Berners-Lee, Reagle, Brown,
       List(Vincent)]
         1 Entries may include explicit content type information.
            [List(Solo)]
    3 XML-Signatures are first class objects themselves and consequently
       can be referenced and signed. [Berners-Lee, Reagle]
    4 Algorithm Identification
         A. Whenever possible, any resource or algorithm identifier is a
            first class object, and addressable by a URI. [Beners-Lee,
            Reagle]
         B. Ability to specify algorithms independently and to reference
            the algorithms linked to standard algorithm specifications
            (e.g. OIDs) [List(Solo)]
    5 XML-Signatures must be able to apply to the original version of an
       included/encoded resource. [WS-list (Brown/Himes)]

Format

    1 An XML-Signature is XML. [Charter]
    2 An XML document of a certain type must still be recognizable as
       its original type when signed. [WS-summary]
    3 XML-Signature will provide a mechanism that facilitates the
       production of composite documents -- by addition or deletion --
       while preserving the signature characteristics (integrity,
       authentication, and non-repudiatability) of the consituent parts.
       [Charter, Brown, List(Bugbee)]
    4 ?Packaging?

Cryptography

    1 The solution shall provide indifferently for digital signature and
       message authentication codes, considering symmetric and asymmetric
       authentication schemes as well as dynamic negotiation of keying
       material. [Brown]

Processing

    1 In the event of redundant attributes within the XML Signature
       syntax and relevant cryptographic blobs, XML Signature
       applications prefer the XML Signature semantics. [Reagle]

Coordination

   The XML Signature specification should meet the requirements of the
   following applications:
    1 Internet Open Trading Protocol v2.0 [Charter]
    2 Financial Services Mark Up Language v2.0 [Charter]





Reagle                                                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft         XML-Signature Requirements       June 1999

   To ensure the above requirements are adequately addressed, the XML
   Signature specification must be reviewed by a designated member of the
   following communities:
    1 XML Syntax Working Group [Charter]
    2 XML Linking Working Group [Charter]
    3 XML Schema Working Group [Charter]
    4 Metadata Coordination Group [Charter]
    5 ?W3C Internationalization Interest Group?

4 References

   Berners-Lee
          Axioms of Web Architecture: URIs.
          http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html

   Brown-XML-DSig
          Internet Draft. Digital Signatures for XML
          http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brown-xml-dsig-00.
          txt

   C14N
          XML Canonicalization Requirements.
          http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-xml-canonical-req

   Charter
          XML-DSig Charter.
          http://www.w3.org/1999/05/XML-DSig-charter-990521.html

   DOMHASH
          Internet Draft. Digest Values for DOM (DOMHASH)
          http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hiroshi-dom-hash-0
          1txt

   Infoset-Req
          XML Information Set Requirements Note.
          http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-xml-infoset-req

   IOTP-DSig
          Internet Draft. Digital Signatures for the Internet Open
          Trading Protocol
          http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-trade-iotp-v1.0-
          dsig-00.txt

   Namespaces
          Namespaces in XML Recommendation.
          http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names

   Signature List
          http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/





Reagle                                                  [Page 1]

Internet Draft         XML-Signature Requirements       June 1999

   WS (list, summary)
          XML-DSig '99: The W3C Signed XML Workshop
          http://www.w3.org/DSig/signed-XML99/
          http://www.w3.org/DSig/signed-XML99/summary.html

   XLink
          XML Linking Language
          http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xlink

   XML
          Extensible Markup Language (XML) Recommendation.
          http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml

   XML-namespaces
          Namespaces in XML
          http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/

   XPointer
          XML Pointer Language (XPointer)
          http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xptr

   WebData
          Web Architecture: Describing and Exchanging Data.
          http://www.w3.org/1999/04/WebData