Network Working Group R. Moskowitz
Internet-Draft ICSA labs
Intended status: Standards Track July 26, 2010
Expires: January 27, 2011
HIP Diet EXchange (DEX)
draft-moskowitz-hip-rg-dex-02
Abstract
This document specifies the details of the Host Identity Protocol
Diet EXchange (HIP DEX). HIP DEX is a variant of the HIP Base
EXchange (HIP BEX) [RFC5201-bis] specifically designed to use as few
crypto primatives as possible yet still deliver the same class of
security features as HIP BEX.
The design goal of HIP DEX is to be usable by sensor devices that are
code and processor constrained. Like HIP BEX it is expected to be
used together with another suitable security protocol, such as the
Encapsulated Security Payload (ESP). HIP DEX can also be used
directly as a keying mechanism for a MAC layer security protocol as
is supported by IEEE 802.15.4 [IEEE.802-15-4.2006].
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 http://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 January 27, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 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
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
(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 Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. The HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Memo Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2. Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. The DEX Host Identifier Tag (HIT) and Its Representations . . 6
3.1. Host Identity Tag (HIT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Generating a HIT from an HI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Protocol Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Creating a HIP Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.1. HIP Puzzle Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.2. Puzzle Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.3. HIP State Machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1.4. HIP DEX Security Associations . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.1.5. User Data Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. Packet Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1. HIP Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.1. HIT_SUITE_LIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1.2. ENCRYPTED_KEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1.3. HIP_MAC_3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2. HIP Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2.1. I1 - the HIP Initiator Packet . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.2. R1 - the HIP Responder Packet . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.3. I2 - the Second HIP Initiator Packet . . . . . . . . . 20
5.2.4. R2 - the Second HIP Responder Packet . . . . . . . . . 21
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
5.3. ICMP Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6. Packet Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.1. Solving the Puzzle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.2. HIP_MAC Calculation and Verification . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.2.1. CMAC Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.3. HIP DEX KEYMAT Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.4. Processing Incoming I1 Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.4.1. R1 Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.5. Processing Incoming R1 Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.6. Processing Incoming I2 Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.7. Processing Incoming R2 Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.8. Sending UPDATE Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.9. Handling State Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7. HIP Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Appendix A. Using Responder Puzzles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Appendix B. Generating a Public Key Encoding from an HI . . . . . 35
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
1. Introduction
NOTE: This version of the draft was prepared for the HIP RG meeting
with MOST of the additions worked out since the last draft. However,
it was NOT carefully edited and some parts are still mis-matched
between the old and new discriptive text.
This memo specifies the details of the Host Identity Protocol Diet
EXchange (HIP DEX). HIP DEX uses the smallest possible set of
established cryptographic primitives, in such a manner that does not
change our understanding of their behaviour, yet in a different
formulation to achieve assertions normally met with different
primatives.
HIP DEX builds on HIP BEX [RFC5201-bis], and only the differences
between BEX and DEX are documented here.
There are a few key differences between BEX and DEX.
Minimum collection of cryptographic primatives.
AES-CBC for symmetric encryption and to provide CMAC for MACing
functions.
Static/Static Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman keys used to
encrypt the session key.
A simple trunctation function for HIT generation.
Forfeit of Perfect Forward Secrecy with the dropping of ephemeral
Diffie-Hellman.
Forfeit of digital signatures with the removal of a hash function.
Reliance of DH derived key used in HIP_MAC to prove ownership of
the private key.
Provide a Password Authentication within the exchange. This may
be supported by BEX as well, but not defined there.
Operate in an aggressive retransmission manner to deal with the
high packet loss nature of sensor networks. This retransmission
also provides an indirect acknowledgement of exchange completion.
1.1. The HIP Diet EXchange (DEX)
The HIP diet exchange is a two-party cryptographic protocol used to
establish communications context between hosts. The first party is
called the Initiator and the second party the Responder. The four-
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
packet design helps to make HIP DoS resilient. The protocol
transmits an EC Diffie-Hellman encrypted key in the 3rd and 4th
packets, and authenticates the parties also in the 3rd and 4th
packets. Additionally, the Responder starts a puzzle exchange in the
2nd packet, with the Initiator completing it in the 3rd packet before
the Responder stores any state from the exchange.
Thus DEX is operationally similar to BEX, just keyed more along the
lines of TLS. The model is also fairly equivalent to 802.11-2007
[IEEE.802-11.2007] Master Key and Pair-wise Transient Key, but
handled in a single exchange.
HIP DEX does not have the option of encrypting the Host Identity of
the Initiator in the 3rd packet. The Responder's Host Identity is
also not protected. Thus there is no attempt at anonymity as in BEX.
Data packets start to flow after the 4th packet. HIP DEX does not
have an explicit transition for the Responder to connected state.
This is learned when the Responder starts receiving protected
datagrams, indicating that the Initiator received the R2 packet. As
such the Intiator should take care to NOT send the first data packet
until some delta time after it received the R2 packet. This is to
provide time for the Responder to process any aggresively
retransmitted I2 packets.
An existing HIP association can be updated using the update mechanism
defined in this document, and when the association is no longer
needed, it can be closed using the defined closing mechanism.
Finally, HIP is designed as an end-to-end authentication and key
establishment protocol, to be used with Encapsulated Security Payload
(ESP) [RFC5202] and other end-to-end security protocols. The base
protocol does not cover all the fine-grained policy control found in
Internet Key Exchange (IKE) [RFC4306] that allows IKE to support
complex gateway policies. Thus, HIP is not a replacement for IKE.
1.2. Memo Structure
The rest of this memo is structured as follows. Section 2 defines
the central keywords, notation, and terms used throughout the rest of
the document. Section 4 gives an overview of the HIP base exchange
protocol. Section 6 define the rules for packet processing.
Finally, Sections 7, 8, and 9 discuss policy, security, and IANA
considerations, respectively.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
2. Terms and Definitions
2.1. Requirements 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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2.2. Notation
[x] indicates that x is optional.
{x} indicates that x is encrypted.
X(y) indicates that y is a parameter of X.
<x>i indicates that x exists i times.
--> signifies "Initiator to Responder" communication (requests).
<-- signifies "Responder to Initiator" communication (replies).
| signifies concatenation of information-- e.g., X | Y is the
concatenation of X with Y.
Ltrunc (M(x), K) denotes the lowest order K bits of the result of
the mac function M on the input x.
3. The DEX Host Identifier Tag (HIT) and Its Representations
The DEX Host Identity Tag (HIT) is distinguished in two ways from the
BEX HIT:
The HIT SUITE ID Section 5.1.1 is ONLY a DEX ID.
The HIT DEX hit is not generated via a cryptographic hash. Rather
it is a truncation of the Elliptic Curve Host Identity.
3.1. Host Identity Tag (HIT)
The DEX Host Identity Tag is a 128-bit value -- a truncation of the
Host Identifier. There are two advantages of using a Host Identity
Tag over the actual Host Identity public key in protocols. Firstly,
its fixed length makes for easier protocol coding and also better
manages the packet size cost of this technology. Secondly, it
presents a consistent format to the protocol whatever underlying
identity technology is used.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
BEX uses RFC 4843-bis [RFC4843-bis] specified 128-bit hash-based
identifiers, called Overlay Routable Cryptographic Hash Identifiers
(ORCHIDs). Their prefix, allocated from the IPv6 address block, is
defined in [RFC4843-bis].
In DEX, a cryptographic hash is NOT used to form the HIT. Rather the
HI is truncated to 96 bits.
3.2. Generating a HIT from an HI
The DEX HIT is not an ORCHID, as there is no hash function in DEX.
Since a HI that is an ECDH key is directly computed from a random
number it is already collision resistant. The DEX HIT is the left-
truncated 96 bits of the HI. This 96 bit value is used in place of
the hash in the ORCHID. The HIT suite (see Section 9) is used for
the four bits of the Orchid Generation Algorithm (OGA) field in the
ORCHID. The same IPv6 prefix used in BEX is used for DEX.
4. Protocol Overview
The following material is an overview of the differences between the
BEX and DEX implementations of the HIP protocol. It is expected that
[RFC5201-bis] is well understood first.
4.1. Creating a HIP Association
By definition, the system initiating a HIP exchange is the Initiator,
and the peer is the Responder. This distinction is forgotten once
the base exchange completes, and either party can become the
Initiator in future communications.
The HIP Diet EXchange serves to manage the establishment of state
between an Initiator and a Responder. The first packet, I1,
initiates the exchange, and the last three packets, R1, I2, and R2,
constitute an authenticated secret key wrapped by a Diffie-Hellman
derived key for session key generation. The HIP association keys are
drawn from this keying material. If other cryptographic keys are
needed, e.g., to be used with ESP, they are expected to be drawn from
the same keying material.
The second packet, R1, starts the actual exchange. It contains a
puzzle -- a cryptographic challenge that the Initiator must solve
before continuing the exchange. The level of difficulty of the
puzzle can be adjusted based on level of trust with the Initiator,
current load, or other factors. The R1 also contains lists of
cryptographic algorithms supported by the Responder. Based on these
lists, the Initiator can continue, abort, or restart the base
exchange with a different selection of cryptographic algorithms.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
In the I2 packet, the Initiator must display the solution to the
received puzzle. Without a correct solution, the I2 message is
discarded. The I2 also contains a key wrap parameter that carries
the key for the Responder. This key is only half the final session
key. The packet is MACed by the sender (Initiator).
The R2 packet finalizes the base exchange. The R2 contains a key
wrap parameter that carries the rest of the key for the Initiator.
The packet is MACed by the sender (Initiator).
The base exchange is illustrated below. The term "key" refers to the
Host Identity public key, "secret" refers to a random value encrypted
by a public key, and "sig" represents a signature using such a key.
The packets contain other parameters not shown in this figure.
Initiator Responder
I1:
-------------------------->
select precomputed R1
R1: puzzle, PK
<-------------------------
solve puzzle remain stateless
PK Encrypt x
I2: solution, PK, ECR(DH,secret x), mac
-------------------------->
check puzzle
check mac
PK Encrypt y
R2: PK, ECR(DH,secret y), mac
<--------------------------
check mac
4.1.1. HIP Puzzle Mechanism
The purpose of the HIP puzzle mechanism is to protect the Responder
from a number of denial-of-service threats. It allows the Responder
to delay state creation until receiving I2. Furthermore, the puzzle
allows the Responder to use a fairly cheap calculation to check that
the Initiator is "sincere" in the sense that it has churned CPU
cycles in solving the puzzle.
DEX uses the CMAC function instead of a hash function as in BEX.
The puzzle mechanism has been explicitly designed to give space for
various implementation options. It allows a Responder implementation
to completely delay session-specific state creation until a valid I2
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
is received. In such a case, a correctly formatted I2 can be
rejected only once the Responder has checked its validity by
computing one CMAC function. On the other hand, the design also
allows a Responder implementation to keep state about received I1s,
and match the received I2s against the state, thereby allowing the
implementation to avoid the computational cost of the CMAC function.
The drawback of this latter approach is the requirement of creating
state. Finally, it also allows an implementation to use other
combinations of the space-saving and computation-saving mechanisms.
Generally speaking, the puzzle mechanism works in DEX the same as in
BEX. There are some implementation differences, using CMAC rather
than a hash.
See Appendix A for one possible implementation. Implementations
SHOULD include sufficient randomness to the algorithm so that
algorithmic complexity attacks become impossible [CRO03].
4.1.2. Puzzle Exchange
The Responder starts the puzzle exchange when it receives an I1. The
Responder supplies a random number I, and requires the Initiator to
find a number J. To select a proper J, the Initiator must create the
concatenation of the HITs of the parties and J, and feed this
concatenation using I as the key into the CMAC algorithm. The lowest
order K bits of the result MUST be zeros. The value K sets the
difficulty of the puzzle.
To generate a proper number J, the Initiator will have to generate a
number of Js until one produces the CMAC target of zeros. The
Initiator SHOULD give up after exceeding the puzzle lifetime in the
PUZZLE parameter ([RFC5201-bis]). The Responder needs to re-create
the concatenation of the HITs and the provided J, and compute the
CMAC using I once to prove that the Initiator did its assigned task.
To prevent precomputation attacks, the Responder MUST select the
number I in such a way that the Initiator cannot guess it.
Furthermore, the construction MUST allow the Responder to verify that
the value was indeed selected by it and not by the Initiator. See
Appendix A for an example on how to implement this.
Using the Opaque data field in an ECHO_REQUEST_UNSIGNED parameter
([RFC5201-bis]), the Responder can include some data in R1 that the
Initiator must copy unmodified in the corresponding I2 packet. The
Responder can generate the Opaque data in various ways; e.g., using
some secret, the sent I, and possibly other related data. Using the
same secret, the received I (from the I2), and the other related data
(if any), the Receiver can verify that it has itself sent the I to
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
the Initiator. The Responder MUST periodically change such a used
secret.
It is RECOMMENDED that the Responder generates a new puzzle and a new
R1 once every few minutes. Furthermore, it is RECOMMENDED that the
Responder remembers an old puzzle at least 2*Lifetime seconds after
the puzzle has been deprecated. These time values allow a slower
Initiator to solve the puzzle while limiting the usability that an
old, solved puzzle has to an attacker.
4.1.3. HIP State Machine
The HIP protocol itself has little state. In HIP DEX, as in BEX,
there is an Initiator and a Responder. Once the security
associations (SAs) are established, this distinction is lost. If the
HIP state needs to be re-established, the controlling parameters are
which peer still has state and which has a datagram to send to its
peer.
The HIP DEX state machine has the same states as the BEX state
machine. However, there is an optional to implement aggresive
transmission feature to provide better performance in sensor networks
with high packet loss. the following documents the few differences in
the DEX state machine.
4.1.3.1. HIP Aggresive Transmission Mechanism
HIP DEX may be used on networks with high packet loss. DEX deals
with this by using an aggressive transmission practice for I1 and I2
packets. The Initiator SHOULD continually send I1 and I2 packets at
some short interval t msec, based on local policy. The transmission
stops on receipt of the corresponding R1 or R2 packet, which acts as
an acknowledgment receipt.
Since the Responder is stateless until it receives an I2, it does not
need any special behaviour on sending R1 other than to send one
whenever it receives an I1. The Responder sends an R2 after receipt
every I2. The Responder does need to know that R2 was received by
the Initiator. Like in BEX, the Responder can learn this when it
starts receiving datagrams.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
4.1.3.2. HIP States
+---------------------+---------------------------------------------+
| State | Explanation |
+---------------------+---------------------------------------------+
| UNASSOCIATED | State machine start |
| | |
| I1-SENT | Initiating base exchange |
| | |
| I2-SENT | Waiting to complete base exchange |
| | |
| R2-SENT | Waiting to complete base exchange |
| | |
| ESTABLISHED | HIP association established |
| | |
| CLOSING | HIP association closing, no data can be |
| | sent |
| | |
| CLOSED | HIP association closed, no data can be sent |
| | |
| E-FAILED | HIP exchange failed |
+---------------------+---------------------------------------------+
Table 1: HIP States
4.1.3.3. HIP State Processes
System behavior in state I1-SENT, Table 2.
+---------------------+-----------------------------+
| Trigger | Action |
+---------------------+-----------------------------+
| t msec | Send I1 and stay at I1-SENT |
+---------------------+-----------------------------+
Table 2: I1-SENT - Initiating HIP
System behavior in state I2-SENT, Table 3.
+---------------------+-----------------------------+
| Trigger | Action |
+---------------------+-----------------------------+
| t msec | Send I2 and stay at I2-SENT |
+---------------------+-----------------------------+
Table 3: I2-SENT - Waiting to finish HIP
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
System behavior in state R2-SENT, Table 4.
+----------------------+-----------------------------+
| Trigger | Action |
+----------------------+-----------------------------+
| Receive duplicate I2 | Send R2 and stay at R2-SENT |
+----------------------+-----------------------------+
Table 4: R2-SENT - Waiting to finish HIP
4.1.3.4. Simplified HIP State Diagram
The following diagram shows the major state transitions. Transitions
based on received packets implicitly assume that the packets are
successfully authenticated or processed.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
+-+ +------------------------------+
I1 received, send R1 | | | |
| v v |
Datagram to send +--------------+ I2 received, send R2 |
Send I1 +--------------| UNASSOCIATED |--------------+ |
+-+ | +-+ +--------------+ | |
send | | | | | | |
I1 t | | | | | Alg. not supported, send I1 | |
msec v | v | v | |
+---------+ I2 received, send R2 | |
+---->| I1-SENT |-------------------------------------+ | |
| +---------+ | | |
| | +----------------------+ | | +-+receive |
| send I2+-+ | R1 received, | I2 received, send R2 | | | | |I2, |
| t msec | v v send I2 | v v v | v send R2 |
| +---------+ | +---------+ |
| +->| I2-SENT |------------+ | R2-SENT |<--+ |
| | +---------+ +---------+ | |
| | | | | |
| | | data| | |
| |receive | or| | |
| |R1, send | EC timeout| receive I2,| |
| |I2 |R2 received +--------------+ | send R2| |
| | +----------->| ESTABLISHED |<--------+ | |
| | +--------------+ | |
| | | | | receive I2, send R2 | |
| | recv+------------+ | +------------------------+ |
| | CLOSE,| | | |
| | send| No packet sent| | |
| | CLOSE_ACK| /received for | timeout | |
| | | UAL min, send | +---------+<-+ (UAL+MSL) | |
| | | CLOSE +--->| CLOSING |--+ retransmit | |
| | | +---------+ CLOSE | |
+--|------------|----------------------+| | | | | |
+------------|-----------------------+ | | +-----------------+ |
| | +-----------+ +-------------------|----+
| +-----------+ | receive CLOSE, CLOSE_ACK | |
| | | send CLOSE_ACK received or | |
| | | timeout | |
| | | (UAL+MSL) | |
| v v | |
| +--------+ receive I2, send R2 | |
+-----------------------| CLOSED |----------------------------+ |
+--------+ /-------------------------+
^ | \-------/ timeout (UAL+2MSL),
| | move to UNASSOCIATED
+-+
CLOSE received, send CLOSE_ACK
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
4.1.4. HIP DEX Security Associations
HIP DEX establishes two Security Associations (SA), one for the
Diffie-Hellman derived key, or Master Key, and one for session or
Pair-wise Key.
4.1.4.1. Master Key SA
The Master Key SA is used to secure DEX parameters and authenticate
HIP packets. Since so little data will be protected by this SA it
can be very longed lived.
The Master Key SA contains the following elements.
Source HIT
Destination HIT
HIP_Encrypt Key
HIP_MAC Key
Both keys are extracted from the Diffie-Hellman derived key via
Section 6.3. Their length is determined by HIP_CIPHER.
4.1.4.2. Pair-wise Key SA
The Pair-wise Key SA is used to secure and authenticate user data.
It is refreshed (or rekeyed) using the UPDATE packet exchange.
The Pair-wise Key SA elements are defined by the data transform (e.g.
ESP_TRANSFORM [RFC5202]).
The secrets in ENCRYPTED_KEY from I2 and R2 are concatenated to form
the input to a Key Derivation Function (KDF). If the data transform
does not have its own KDF, then Section 6.3 is used. Even though
this input is is randomly distributed, a KDF Extract phase may be
needed to get the proper length for input to the KDF Expand phase.
4.1.5. User Data Considerations
There is no difference in User Data Considerations between BEX and
DEX with one exception. Loss of state due to system reboot may be a
critical performance issue. Thus implementors MAY choose to use non-
volatile, secure storage for HIP state so it will survive system
reboot. This will limit state loss during reboots to only those
situtations that there is an SA timeout.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
5. Packet Formats
5.1. HIP Parameters
The HIP Parameters are used to carry the public key associated with
the sender's HIT, together with related security and other
information. They consist of ordered parameters, encoded in TLV
format.
The following new parameter types are currently defined for DEX, in
addition to those defined for BEX. Also listed are BEX parameters
that have additional values for DEX.
For the BEX parameters, DIFFIE_HELMAN, DH_GROUP_LIST, and HOST_ID,
only the ECC values are valid in DEX.
+------------------+-------+----------+-----------------------------+
| TLV | Type | Length | Data |
+------------------+-------+----------+-----------------------------+
| ENCRYPTED_KEY | 643 | variable | Encrypted container of for |
| | | | key generation exchange |
| | | | |
| HIP_MAC_3 | 61507 | variable | CMAC-based message |
| | | | authentication code |
| | | | |
| HIT_SUITE_LIST | 715 | variable | Ordered list of the HIT |
| | | | suites supported by the |
| | | | Responder |
+------------------+-------+----------+-----------------------------+
5.1.1. HIT_SUITE_LIST
The HIT suites in DEX are limited to:
HIT suite ID
ECDH/DEX 8
The HIT_SUITE_LIST parameter contains a list of the supported HIT
suite IDs of the Responder. Since the HIT of the Initiator is a DEX
HIT, the Responder MUST only respond with a DEX HIT suite ID.
Currently, only one such suite ID has been defined.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
5.1.2. ENCRYPTED_KEY
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
/ Encrypted value /
/ /
/ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ /
/ Nonce /
/ +-------------------------------+
/ | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type 643
Length length in octets, excluding Type, Length, and
Padding
Encrypted The value is encrypted using an encryption algorithm
value as defined in the HIP_CIPHER parameter.
Nonce Nonce included in encrypted text.
The ENCRYPTED parameter encapsulates a value and a nonce. The value
is typically a random number used in a key creation process and the
nonce is known to the receiver to validate successful decryption.
Some encryption algorithms require an IV (initialization vector).
The IV MUST be known to the receiver through some source other than
within the Encrypted_key block. For example the Puzzle value, I, can
be used as an IV.
Some encryption algorithms require that the data to be encrypted must
be a multiple of the cipher algorithm block size. In this case, the
above block of data MUST include additional padding, as specified by
the encryption algorithm. The size of the extra padding is selected
so that the length of the unencrypted data block is a multiple of the
cipher block size. The encryption algorithm may specify padding
bytes other than zero; for example, AES [FIPS.197.2001] uses the
PKCS5 padding scheme (see section 6.1.1 of [RFC2898]) where the
remaining n bytes to fill the block each have the value n. This
yields an "unencrypted data" block that is transformed to an
"encrypted data" block by the cipher suite. This extra padding added
to the set of parameters to satisfy the cipher block alignment rules
is not counted in HIP TLV length fields, and this extra padding
should be removed by the cipher suite upon decryption.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
Note that the length of the cipher suite output may be smaller or
larger than the length of the value and nonce to be encrypted, since
the encryption process may compress the data or add additional
padding to the data.
Once this encryption process is completed, the Encrypted_key data
field is ready for inclusion in the Parameter. If necessary,
additional Padding for 8-byte alignment is then added according to
the rules of TLV Format in [RFC5201-bis].
5.1.3. HIP_MAC_3
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
| CMAC |
/ /
/ +-------------------------------+
| | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type 61507
Length length in octets, excluding Type, Length, and
Padding
CMAC CMAC computed over the HIP packet, excluding the
HIP_MAC parameter itself. The checksum field MUST
be set to zero and the HIP header length in the HIP
common header MUST be calculated not to cover any
excluded parameters when the CMAC is calculated. The
size of the CMAC is the natural size of the AES block
depending on the AES key size.
The CMAC calculation and verification process is presented in
Section 6.2.1.
5.2. HIP Packets
DEX uses the same eight basic HIP packets (see [RFC5201-bis]) as BEX.
Four are for the HIP exchange, one is for updating, one is for
sending notifications, and two are for closing a HIP association.
There are some differences in the HIP parameters in the exchange
packets between BEX and DEX. This section will cover the DEX
packets.
An important difference between BEX and DEX HIP packets is that there
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
is NO HIP_SIGNATURE available in DEX. Thus R1 is completely
unprotected and can be spoof. The I2, R2, UPDATE, NOTIFY, CLOSE, and
CLOSE_ACK only have HIP_MAC_3 for packet authentication The
processing of these packets are changed accordingly.
In the future, an OPTIONAL upper-layer payload MAY follow the HIP
header. The Next Header field in the header indicates if there is
additional data following the HIP header. The HIP packet, however,
MUST NOT be fragmented. This limits the size of the possible
additional data in the packet.
5.2.1. I1 - the HIP Initiator Packet
The HIP header values for the I1 packet:
Header:
Packet Type = 1
SRC HIT = Initiator's HIT
DST HIT = Responder's HIT, or NULL
IP ( HIP ( DH_GROUP_LIST ) )
Minimum size = 40 bytes
The I1 packet contains the fixed HIP header and the Initiator's
DH_GROUP_LIST.
Valid control bits: none
The Initiator HIT MUST be a DEX HIT. That is the HIT Suite ID MUST
be of a DEX type. Currently only ECDH/DEX is defined.
The Initiator gets the Responder's HIT either from a DNS lookup of
the Responder's FQDN, from some other repository, or from a local
table. The Responder's HIT MUST be a DEX HIT. If the Initiator does
not know the Responder's HIT, it may attempt to use opportunistic
mode by using NULL (all zeros) as the Responder's HIT. See also "HIP
Opportunistic Mode" [RFC5201-bis].
Since this packet is so easy to spoof even if it were signed, no
attempt is made to add to its generation or processing cost.
The Initiator includes a DH_GROUP_LIST parameter in the I1 to inform
the Responder of its preferred DH Group IDs. Only ECDH Groups may be
included in this list. Note that the DH_GROUP_LIST in the I1 packet
is not protected by a MAC.
Implementations MUST be able to handle a storm of received I1
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
packets, discarding those with common content that arrive within a
small time delta, but distinguishing this from arriving at a set time
delta. This behaviour is the expected behaviour for an Initiator on
a network with high packet loss. The HIP state machine calls out
this behaviour in this case and the Initiator will stop sending I1
packets after it receives an R1 packet.
5.2.2. R1 - the HIP Responder Packet
The HIP header values for the R1 packet:
Header:
Packet Type = 2
SRC HIT = Responder's HIT
DST HIT = Initiator's HIT
IP ( HIP ( [ R1_COUNTER, ]
PUZZLE,
HIP_CIPHER,
HOST_ID,
HIT_SUITE_LIST,
DH_GROUP_LIST,
[ <, ECHO_REQUEST_UNSIGNED >i ])
Minimum size = 120 bytes
Valid control bits: A
If the Responder's HI is an anonymous one, the A control MUST be set.
The Initiator's HIT MUST match the one received in I1. If the
Responder has multiple HIs, the Responder's HIT used MUST match
Initiator's request. If the Initiator used opportunistic mode, the
Responder may select freely among its HIs. See also "HIP
Opportunistic Mode" [RFC5201-bis].
The R1 generation counter is used to determine the currently valid
generation of puzzles. The value is increased periodically, and it
is RECOMMENDED that it is increased at least as often as solutions to
old puzzles are no longer accepted.
The Puzzle contains a Random #I and the difficulty K. The difficulty
K indicates the number of lower-order bits, in the puzzle CMAC
result, that must be zeros; see Section 4.1.2.
The Initiator HIT does not provide the HOST_ID key size. The
Responder selects its HOST_ID based on the Initiator's preference
expressed in the DH_GROUP_LIST parameter in the I1. The Responder
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
sends back its own preference based on which it chose the HOST_ID as
DH_GROUP_LIST. This allows the Initiator to determine whether its
own DH_GROUP_LIST in the I1 was manipulated by an attacker. There is
a further risk that the Responder's DH_GROUP_LIST was manipulated by
an attacker, as R1 cannot be authenticated in DEX as it can in BEX.
Thus it is repeated in R2 allowing for a final check at that point.
In DEX, the Diffie-Hellman HOST_ID values are static. They are NOT
discarded.
The HIP_CIPHER contains the encryption algorithms supported by the
Responder to protect the key exchange, in the order of preference.
All implementations MUST support the AES-CBC [RFC3602].
The ECHO_REQUEST_UNSIGNED contains data that the sender wants to
receive unmodified in the corresponding response packet in the
ECHO_RESPONSE_UNSIGNED parameter.
5.2.3. I2 - the Second HIP Initiator Packet
The HIP header values for the I2 packet:
Header:
Type = 3
SRC HIT = Initiator's HIT
DST HIT = Responder's HIT
IP ( HIP ( [R1_COUNTER,]
SOLUTION,
HIP_CIPHER,
HOST_ID,
ENCRYPTED_KEY {DH, secret-x|I},
[ ENCRYPTED {DH, ENCRYPTED_KEY {passwd, challenge } },]
HIP_MAC_3,
[<, ECHO_RESPONSE_UNSIGNED>i )] )
Minimum size = 180 bytes
Valid control bits: A
The HITs used MUST match the ones used previously.
If the Initiator's HI is an anonymous one, the A control MUST be set.
The Initiator MAY include an unmodified copy of the R1_COUNTER
parameter received in the corresponding R1 packet into the I2 packet.
The Solution contains the Random #I from R1 and the computed #J. The
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
low-order K bits of the CMAC(S, | ... | J) MUST be zero.
In DEX, the Diffie-Hellman HOST_ID values are static. They are NOT
discarded.
The HIP_CIPHER contains the single encryption transform selected by
the Initiator, that will be used to protect the HI exchange. The
chosen transform MUST correspond to one offered by the Responder in
the R1. All implementations MUST support the AES-CBC transform
[RFC3602].
The ECHO_RESPONSE_UNSIGNED contain the unmodified Opaque data copied
from the corresponding echo request parameter.
The ENCRYPTED_KEY contains an Initiator generated random secret x
that MUST be uniformly distributed that is concatenated with I from
the puzzle. The secret x's length matches the keysize of the
selected encryption transform. I from the puzzle is used as the IV
in the encryption transform. This acts as a nonce from the Responder
to prove freshness of the secret wrapping from the Initiator. I in
the ENCRYPTED block enables the Responder to validate a proper
decryption of the block. The key for the encryption is the
HIP_Encrypt key.
If the Initiator has prior knowledge that the Responder is expecting
a password authenication, the Initiator encrypts the
ECHO_REQUEST_UNSIGNED with the password, then wraps the ENCRYPTED
parameter in the secret x. I from the puzzle is used as the nonce
here as well. There is no signal within R1 for this behaviour.
Knowledge of password authencation must be externally configured.
The MAC is calculated over the whole HIP envelope, excluding any
parameters after the HIP_MAC_3, as described in Section 6.2.1. The
Responder MUST validate the HIP_MAC_3.
5.2.4. R2 - the Second HIP Responder Packet
The HIP header values for the R2 packet:
Header:
Packet Type = 4
SRC HIT = Responder's HIT
DST HIT = Initiator's HIT
IP ( HIP ( DH_GROUP_LIST,
ENCRYPTED_KEY {DH, secret-y|I},
HIP_MAC_3)
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
Minimum size = 108 bytes
Valid control bits: none
The Responder repeats the DH_GROUP_LIST parameter in R2. This MUST
be the same list as included in R1. The DH_GROUP_LIST parameter is
repeated here because R2 is MACed and thus cannot be altered by an
attacker. This allows the Initiator to determine whether its own
DH_GROUP_LIST in the I1 was manipulated by an attacker.
The ENCRYPTED contains an Responder generated random secret y that
MUST be uniformly distributed that is concatenated with I from the
puzzle. The secret y's length matches the keysize of the selected
encryption transform. I from the puzzle is used as the IV in the
encryption transform. This acts as a nonce from the Initiator to
prove freshness of the secret wrapping from the Responder. I in the
ENCRYPTED block enables the Responder to validate a proper decryption
of the block. The key for the encryption is the HIP_Encrypt key.
The HIP_MAC_3 is calculated over the whole HIP envelope, with
Responder's HOST_ID parameter concatenated with the HIP envelope.
The HOST_ID parameter is removed after the CMAC calculation. The
procedure is described in Section 6.2.1.
The Initiator MUST validate the HIP_MAC_3.
5.3. ICMP Messages
When a HIP implementation detects a problem with an incoming packet,
and it either cannot determine the identity of the sender of the
packet or does not have any existing HIP association with the sender
of the packet, it MAY respond with an ICMP packet. Any such replies
MUST be rate-limited as described in [RFC2463]. In most cases, the
ICMP packet will have the Parameter Problem type (12 for ICMPv4, 4
for ICMPv6), with the Pointer field pointing to the field that caused
the ICMP message to be generated.
6. Packet Processing
Each host is assumed to have a single HIP protocol implementation
that manages the host's HIP associations and handles requests for new
ones. Each HIP association is governed by a conceptual state
machine, with states defined above in Section 4.1.3. The HIP
implementation can simultaneously maintain HIP associations with more
than one host. Furthermore, the HIP implementation may have more
than one active HIP association with another host; in this case, HIP
associations are distinguished by their respective HITs. It is not
possible to have more than one HIP association between any given pair
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
of HITs. Consequently, the only way for two hosts to have more than
one parallel association is to use different HITs, at least at one
end.
6.1. Solving the Puzzle
This subsection describes the puzzle-solving details.
In R1, the values I and K are sent in network byte order. Similarly,
in I2, the values I and J are sent in network byte order. The mac is
created by concatenating, in network byte order, the following data,
in the following order and using the CMAC algorithm with I as the
key:
128-bit Initiator's HIT, in network byte order, as appearing in
the HIP Payload in R1 and I2.
128-bit Responder's HIT, in network byte order, as appearing in
the HIP Payload in R1 and I2.
n-bit random value J (where n is CMAC-len), in network byte order,
as appearing in I2.
In order to be a valid response puzzle, the K low-order bits of the
resulting CMAC must be zero.
Notes:
i) All the data in the CMAC input MUST be in network byte order.
ii) The order of the Initiator's and Responder's HITs are
different in the R1 and I2 packets; see [RFC5201-bis]. Care must
be taken to copy the values in the right order to the CMAC input.
The following procedure describes the processing steps involved,
assuming that the Responder chooses to precompute the R1 packets:
Precomputation by the Responder:
Sets up the puzzle difficulty K.
Creates a R1 and caches it.
Responder:
Selects a suitable cached R1.
Generates a random number I.
Sends I and K in an R1.
Saves I and K for a Delta time.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
Initiator:
Generates repeated attempts to solve the puzzle until a matching J
is found:
Ltrunc( CMAC( I, HIT-I | HIT-R | J ), K ) == 0
Sends I and J in an I2.
Responder:
Verifies that the received I is a saved one.
Finds the right K based on I.
Computes V := Ltrunc( CMAC( I, HIT-I | HIT-R | J ), K )
Rejects if V != 0
Accept if V == 0
6.2. HIP_MAC Calculation and Verification
The following subsections define the actions for processing the
HIP_MAC_3 parameter.
6.2.1. CMAC Calculation
Both the Initiator and the Responder should take some care when
verifying or calculating the HIP_MAC_3. Specifically, the Responder
should preserve other parameters than the HOST_ID when sending the
R2. Also, the Initiator has to preserve the HOST_ID exactly as it
was received in the R1 packet.
The scope of the calculation for HIP_MAC_3 is:
CMAC: { HIP header | [ Parameters ] }
where Parameters include all HIP parameters of the packet that is
being calculated with Type values from 1 to (HIP_MAC's Type value -
1) and exclude parameters with Type values greater or equal to
HIP_MAC's Type value.
During HIP_MAC calculation, the following applies:
o In the HIP header, the Checksum field is set to zero.
o In the HIP header, the Header Length field value is calculated to
the beginning of the HIP_MAC parameter.
Parameter order is described in [RFC5201-bis].
The HIP_MAC parameter is defined in Section 5.1.3. The CMAC
calculation and verification process is as follows:
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
Packet sender:
1. Create the HIP packet, without the HIP_MAC or any other parameter
with greater Type value than the HIP_MAC parameter has.
2. Calculate the Header Length field in the HIP header.
3. Compute the CMAC using either HIP-gl or HIP-lg integrity key
retrieved from KEYMAT as defined in Section 6.3.
4. Add the HIP_MAC_3 parameter to the packet and any parameter with
greater Type value than the HIP_MAC's (HIP_MAC_3's) that may
follow.
5. Recalculate the Length field in the HIP header.
Packet receiver:
1. Verify the HIP header Length field.
2. Remove the HIP_MAC_3 parameter, as well as all other parameters
that follow it with greater Type value, saving the contents if
they will be needed later.
3. Recalculate the HIP packet length in the HIP header and clear the
Checksum field (set it to all zeros).
4. Compute the CMAC using either HIP-gl or HIP-lg integrity key as
defined in Section 6.3 and verify it against the received CMAC.
5. Set Checksum and Header Length field in the HIP header to
original values.
6.3. HIP DEX KEYMAT Generation
The HIP DEX KEYMAT process is used for both the Diffie-Hellman
Derived Master key and the Encrypted secrets Pair-wise key. The
former uses both the Extract and Expand phases, while the later MAY
need the Extract and Expand phases if the key is longer than 128
bits. Othewise it only needs the Expand phase.
The Diffie-Hellman Derived Master key is exchanged in R1 and I2 and
used in I2, R2. UPDATE, NOTIFY, and ACK packets. The Encrypted
secrets Pair-wise key is not used in HIP, but is available as the
datagram protection key. Some datagram protection mechanisms have
their own Key Derivation Function, and if so that SHOULD be used
rather than the HIP DEX KEYMAT.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
The KEYMAT has two components, CKDF-Extract and CKDF-Expand. The
Extract function COMPRESSES a non-uniformly distributed key, as is
the output of a Diffie-Hellman key derivation, to EXTRACT all the key
entropy into a fixed length output. The Expand function takes either
the output of the Extract function or directly uses a uniformly
distributed key and EXPANDS the length of the key, repeatedly
distributing the key entropy, to produce the keys needed.
The CKDF-Extract function is following operation; the | operation
denotes concatenation.
CKDF-Extract(DHK, info, L) -> CK
where
info = sort(HIT-I | HIT-R) | "CKDF-Extract"
BigK = Diffie-Hellman Derived or Session (x | y) Key
I = I from PUZZLE Parameter
The output CK is calculated as follows:
CK = CMAC(I, BigK | info)
The CKDF-Expand function is following operation; the | operation
denotes concatenation.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
CKDF-Expand(CK, info, L) -> OKM
where
info = sort(HIT-I | HIT-R) | "CKDF-Expand"
CK = CK from CKDF-Extract or (x | y)
PRKlen = Length of PRK in octets
maclen = Length of CMAC in octets = 128/8 = 16
L length of output keying material in octets
(<= 255*macLen)
If PRKlen != macLen then PRK = CMAC(0^128, PRK)
The output OKM is calculated as follows:
N = ceil(L/macLen)
T = T(1) | T(2) | T(3) | ... | T(N)
OKM = first L octets of T
where:
T(0) = empty string (zero length)
T(1) = CMAC(CK, T(0) | info | 0x01)
T(2) = CMAC(CK, T(1) | info | 0x02)
T(3) = CMAC(CK, T(2) | info | 0x03)
...
(where the constant concatenated to the end of each T(n) is a
single octet.)
Sort(HIT-I | HIT-R) is defined as the network byte order
concatenation of the two HITs, with the smaller HIT preceding the
larger HIT, resulting from the numeric comparison of the two HITs
interpreted as positive (unsigned) 128-bit integers in network byte
order.
x and y values are from the ENCRYPTED parameters from I2 and R2
respectively.
The initial keys are drawn sequentially in the order that is
determined by the numeric comparison of the two HITs, with comparison
method described in the previous paragraph. HOST_g denotes the host
with the greater HIT value, and HOST_l the host with the lower HIT
value.
The drawing order for initial keys:
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
HIP-gl encryption key for HOST_g's outgoing HIP packets
HIP-gl integrity (CMAC) key for HOST_g's outgoing HIP packets
HIP-lg encryption key (currently unused) for HOST_l's outgoing HIP
packets
HIP-lg integrity (CMAC) key for HOST_l's outgoing HIP packets
The number of bits drawn for a given algorithm is the "natural" size
of the keys. For the mandatory algorithms, the following sizes
apply:
AES 128 or 256 bits
If other key sizes are used, they must be treated as different
encryption algorithms and defined separately.
6.4. Processing Incoming I1 Packets
An implementation SHOULD reply to an I1 with an R1 packet, unless the
implementation is unable or unwilling to set up a HIP association.
An I1 in DEX is handled identically to BEX with the exception that in
constructing the R1, the Responder SHOULD select a HIT that is
constructed with the MUST algorithm, which is currently ECDH.
6.4.1. R1 Management
All compliant implementations MUST produce R1 packets. An R1 in DEX
is handled identically to BEX.
6.5. Processing Incoming R1 Packets
A system receiving an R1 MUST first check to see if it has sent an I1
to the originator of the R1 (i.e., it is in state I1-SENT). An R1 in
DEX is handled identically to BEX with the following differences.
If the system has been sending out a stream of I1 packets to work
around high packet loss on a network, it stops sending the I1 packets
AFTER successfully processing the R1 packet.
There is no HIP_SIGNATURE on this packet. This is an
unauthentication packet.
The following steps define the conceptual processing rules for
responding to an R1 packet that are different than in BEX:
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
1. If the system is configured with a authentication password for
the responder, it constructs the autentication response to
include in the I2.
2. The system prepares and sends an I2, as described in
Section 5.2.3. The system MAY be configured to continually send
this I2 until it receives and validates an R2.
6.6. Processing Incoming I2 Packets
Upon receipt of an I2, the system MAY perform initial checks to
determine whether the I2 corresponds to a recent R1 that has been
sent out, if the Responder keeps such state. An I2 in DEX is handled
identically to BEX with the following differences.
The HIP implementation SHOULD process the I2. This includes
validation of the puzzle solution, extracting the ENCRYPTED key for
processing I2, decrypting the Initiator's Host Identity, verifying
the mac, creating state, and finally sending an R2.
There is no HIP_SIGNATURE on this packet. Authentication is
completely based on the HIP_MAC_3 parameter.
The following steps define the conceptual processing rules for
responding to an I2 packet:
1. If the system's state machine is in the I2-SENT state, the system
makes a comparison between its local and sender's HITs (similarly
as in Section 6.3). If the local HIT is smaller than the
sender's HIT, it should drop the I2 packet, and continue using
the R1 received and I2 sent to the peer earlier. Otherwise, the
system should process the received I2 packet and drop any
previously derived Diffie-Hellman keying material Kij and
ENCRYPTED keying material it might have formed upon sending the
I2 previously. The peer Diffie-Hellman key, ENCRYPTED keying
material and the nonce J are taken from the just arrived I2
packet. The local Diffie-Hellman key and the nonce I are the
ones that were earlier sent in the R1 packet.
2. The system MUST validate the solution to the puzzle by computing
the mac described in Section 5.2.3 using the CMAC algorithm.
3. The system must extract the keying material from the ENCRYPTED
parameter. This key is used to derive the HIP data keys.
4. If the checks above are valid, then the system proceeds with
further I2 processing; otherwise, it discards the I2 and its
state machine remains in the same state. If the system has been
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
sending a stream of R1 packets to the HIT in the I2 the system
stops sending the R1s.
6.7. Processing Incoming R2 Packets
An R2 received in states UNASSOCIATED, I1-SENT, or ESTABLISHED
results in the R2 being dropped and the state machine staying in the
same state. If an R2 is received in state I2-SENT, it SHOULD be
processed.
There is no HIP_SIGNATURE on this packet. Authentication is
completely based on the HIP_MAC_3 parameter.
The conceptual processing rules for an incoming R2 packet in DEX are
identical to BEX with the following differences.
1. The system checks the DH_GROUP_LIST as in R1 packet processing.
If the list is different from R1's there may have been a DH
downgrade attack against the unprotected R1 packet. If the
DH_GROUP_LIST presents a better list than recieved in the R1
packet, the system may either resend I1 within the retry bounds
or abandon the HIP exchange.
2. The system must extract the keying material from the ENCRYPTED
parameter. This key is concatanated with that sent in the I2
packet to form the HIP data keys.
6.8. Sending UPDATE Packets
A host sends an UPDATE packet when it wants to update some
information related to a HIP association. DEX UPDATE handling is the
similar in DEX as in BEX. The key difference is NO HIP_SIGNATURE.
6.9. Handling State Loss
In the case of system crash and unanticipated state loss, the system
SHOULD delete the corresponding HIP state, including the keying
material. That is, the state SHOULD NOT be stored on stable storage.
If the implementation does drop the state (as RECOMMENDED), it MUST
also drop the peer's R1 generation counter value, unless a local
policy explicitly defines that the value of that particular host is
stored. An implementation MUST NOT store R1 generation counters by
default, but storing R1 generation counter values, if done, MUST be
configured by explicit HITs.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
7. HIP Policies
There are a number of variables that will influence the HIP exchanges
that each host must support. All HIP implementations MUST support
more than one simultaneous HI, at least one of which SHOULD be
reserved for anonymous usage. Although anonymous HIs will be rarely
used as Responders' HIs, they will be common for Initiators. Support
for more than two HIs is RECOMMENDED.
Many Initiators would want to use a different HI for different
Responders. The implementations SHOULD provide for an ACL of
Initiator's HIT to Responder's HIT. This ACL SHOULD also include
preferred transform and local lifetimes.
The value of K used in the HIP R1 packet can also vary by policy. K
should never be greater than 20, but for trusted partners it could be
as low as 0.
Responders would need a similar ACL, representing which hosts they
accept HIP exchanges, and the preferred transform and local
lifetimes. Wildcarding SHOULD be supported for this ACL also.
8. Security Considerations
HIP is designed to provide secure authentication of hosts. HIP also
attempts to limit the exposure of the host to various denial-of-
service and man-in-the-middle (MitM) attacks. In so doing, HIP
itself is subject to its own DoS and MitM attacks that potentially
could be more damaging to a host's ability to conduct business as
usual.
HIP DEX replaces the SIGMA authenticated Diffie-Hellman key exchange
of BEX with a random generated key exchange encrypted by a Diffie-
Hellman derived key. Both the Initiator and Responder contribute to
this key.
The strength of the key is based on the quality of the secrets
generated the Initiator and Responder. Since the Initiator is
commonly a sensor there is a natural concern about the quality of
its random number generator.
DEX lacks Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS). If the Initiator's HI is
compromised, ALL HIP connections protected with that HI are
compromised.
The puzzle mechanism using CMAC may need further study that it
does present the desired level of difficulty.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
The DEX HIT extraction MAY present new attack opportunities;
further study is needed.
The R1 packet is unprotected and offers an attacker new resource
attacks against the Initiator. This is mitigated by the Initator
only processing a received R1 when it has sent an I1. This is
another DoS attack, but for battery powered Initiators, it could be a
concern.
9. IANA Considerations
IANA has reserved protocol number 139 for the Host Identity Protocol.
The following HIT suites are defined for DEX HIT generation.
+-------+------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| Index | Hash | Signature algorithm | Description |
| | function | family | |
+-------+------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| 5 | LTRUNC | ECDH | ECDH HI truncated to |
| | | | 96 bits |
+-------+------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
Table 5: HIT Suites
10. Acknowledgments
The drive to put HIP on a cryptographic 'Diet' came out of a number
of discussions with sensor vendors at IEEE 802.15 meetings. David
McGrew was very
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to
Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
March 1997.
[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol,
Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460,
December 1998.
[RFC2463] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Internet Control
Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet
Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification",
RFC 2463, December 1998.
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
[RFC3602] Frankel, S., Glenn, R., and S. Kelly, "The AES-
CBC Cipher Algorithm and Its Use with IPsec",
RFC 3602, September 2003.
[RFC3972] Aura, T., "Cryptographically Generated
Addresses (CGA)", RFC 3972, March 2005.
[RFC4309] Housley, R., "Using Advanced Encryption
Standard (AES) CCM Mode with IPsec
Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)",
RFC 4309, December 2005.
[RFC4843-bis] Nikander, P., Laganier, J., and F. Dupont,
"STUB: An IPv6 Prefix for Overlay Routable
Cryptographic Hash Identifiers (ORCHID)",
draft-laganier-rfc4843-bis-00 (work in
progress), February 2010.
[RFC5201-bis] Moskowitz, R., Jokela, P., Henderson, T., and
T. Heer, "Host Identity Protocol",
draft-moskowitz-hip-rfc5201-bis-01 (work in
progress), July 2010.
[RFC5202] Jokela, P., Moskowitz, R., and P. Nikander,
"Using the Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)
Transport Format with the Host Identity
Protocol (HIP)", RFC 5202, April 2008.
[fundamental-ecc] McGrew, D. and K. Igoe, "Fundamental Elliptic
Curve Cryptography Algorithms",
draft-mcgrew-fundamental-ecc-02 (work in
progress), February 2010.
11.2. Informative References
[AUR03] Aura, T., Nagarajan, A., and A. Gurtov,
"Analysis of the HIP Base Exchange Protocol",
in Proceedings of 10th Australasian Conference
on Information Security and Privacy, July 2003.
[CRO03] Crosby, SA. and DS. Wallach, "Denial of Service
via Algorithmic Complexity Attacks", in
Proceedings of Usenix Security Symposium 2003,
Washington, DC., August 2003.
[FIPS.197.2001] National Institute of Standards and Technology,
"Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)", FIPS PUB
197, November 2001, <http://csrc.nist.gov/
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
publications/fips/fips197/fips-197.pdf>.
[IEEE.802-11.2007] "Information technology - Telecommunications
and information exchange between systems -
Local and metropolitan area networks - Specific
requirements - Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium
Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
Specifications", IEEE Standard 802.11,
June 2007, <http://standards.ieee.org/
getieee802/download/802.11-2007.pdf>.
[IEEE.802-15-4.2006] "Information technology - Telecommunications
and information exchange between systems -
Local and metropolitan area networks - Specific
requirements - Part 15.4: Wireless Medium
Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
Specifications for Low-Rate Wireless Personal
Area Networks (WPANs)", IEEE Standard 802.15.4,
September 2006, <http://standards.ieee.org/
getieee802/download/802.15.4-2006.pdf>.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in
RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998.
[RFC2898] Kaliski, B., "PKCS #5: Password-Based
Cryptography Specification Version 2.0",
RFC 2898, September 2000.
[RFC4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2)
Protocol", RFC 4306, December 2005.
[rfc4423-bis] Moskowitz, R., "Host Identity Protocol
Architecture",
draft-moskowitz-hip-rfc4423-bis-01 (work in
progress), June 2010.
Appendix A. Using Responder Puzzles
As mentioned in Section 4.1.1, the Responder may delay state creation
and still reject most spoofed I2s by using a number of pre-calculated
R1s and a local selection function. This appendix defines one
possible implementation in detail. The purpose of this appendix is
to give the implementors an idea on how to implement the mechanism.
If the implementation is based on this appendix, it MAY contain some
local modification that makes an attacker's task harder.
The Responder creates a secret value S, that it regenerates
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft HIP Diet EXchange (DEX) July 2010
periodically. The Responder needs to remember the two latest values
of S. Each time the S is regenerated, the R1 generation counter
value is incremented by one and the Responder generates an R1 packet.
When the Initiator sends the I1 packet for initializing a connection,
the Responder gets the HIT and IP address from the packet, and
generates an I value for the puzzle.
I value calculation:
I = Ltrunc( CMAC ( S, HIT-I | HIT-R | IP-I | IP-R ), n)
where n = CMAC-len
From an incoming I2 packet, the Responder gets the required
information to validate the puzzle: HITs, IP addresses, and the
information of the used S value from the R1_COUNTER. Using these
values, the Responder can regenerate the I, and verify it against the
I received in the I2 packet. If the I values match, it can verify
the solution using I, J, and difficulty K. If the I values do not
match, the I2 is dropped.
puzzle_check:
V := Ltrunc( CMAC( I2.I | I2.I, I2.hit_i | I2.hit_r | I2.J ), K )
if V != 0, drop the packet
If the puzzle solution is correct, the I and J values are stored for
later use. They are used as input material when keying material is
generated.
Keeping state about failed puzzle solutions depends on the
implementation. Although it is possible for the Responder not to
keep any state information, it still may do so to protect itself
against certain attacks (see Section 4.1.1).
Appendix B. Generating a Public Key Encoding from an HI
The following pseudo-code illustrates the process to generate a
public key encoding from an HI for ECDH.
Author's Address
Robert Moskowitz
ICSA labs, An Independent Division of Verizon Business
1000 Bent Creek Blvd, Suite 200
Mechanicsburg, PA
USA
EMail: robert.moskowitz@icsalabs.com
Moskowitz Expires January 27, 2011 [Page 35]