Network Working Group                                          C. Newman
Internet Draft: Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections           Innosoft
Document: draft-newman-tls-imappop-00.txt                    August 1997


                 Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections


Status of this memo

     This document is an Internet-Draft.  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."

     To view the entire list of current Internet-Drafts, please check
     the "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts
     Shadow Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net
     (Europe), munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East
     Coast), or ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).


Introduction

     The TLS protocol [TLS] (formerly known as SSL) provides a way to
     secure a connection from tampering and evesdropping.  Obviously,
     such security is desirable for IMAP [IMAP4] and POP [POP3].
     Although advanced authentication mechanisms [IMAP-AUTH, POP-AUTH]
     can provide this service with less complexity than TLS, TLS is
     useful in combination with plaintext password logins and other
     simple mechanisms as it doesn't require a site to upgrade its
     authentication database.

     The common practice of using a separate port for a secure version
     of each protocol has a number of disadvantages in the IMAP [IMAP4]
     and POP [POP3] environment.  Rather than using the best security
     available, it means that clients have to be explicitly configured
     to use the separate secure port or suffer the performance loss of
     probing for active ports.  For IMAP, this is even more serious as
     it would require the definition of a new URL scheme which would
     require support for TLS in order to gain access.




Newman                                                          [Page 1]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


     This specification defines extensions to IMAP4 and POP3 which
     activate TLS.  It defines a set of server security policy response
     codes for use with IMAP4, and extends POP3 to permit such response
     codes.  The response codes MAY be used independently of the TLS
     extension.


0. Open Issues

     1. The cipher suite requirement is included to meet the decisions
     made at the Munich and Danvers IETF meetings.  The additional text
     about exportable ciphers is my invention to hopefully improve
     interoperability.  Comments are welcome.

     2. Should I explicitly revoke registration of the IMAP+SSL port?
     I'm not inclined to do so as this isn't as serious a design flaw as
     the SMTP+SSL port, and there are already deployed IMAP+SSL
     implementations.

     3. Any security considerations I missed?


1. Conventions Used in this Document

     The key words "REQUIRED", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD
     NOT", and "MAY" in this document are to be interpreted as described
     in "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"
     [KEYWORDS].

     Formal syntax is defined using ABNF [ABNF].

     In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
     server respectively.


2. IMAP4 STARTTLS extension

     When the TLS extension is present in IMAP4, "STARTTLS" is listed as
     a capability in response to the CAPABILITY command.  This extension
     adds a single command, "STARTTLS" to the IMAP4 protocol which is
     used to begin a TLS negotiation.










Newman                                                          [Page 2]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


2.1. STARTTLS Command

   Arguments:  none

   Responses:  no specific responses for this command

   Result:     OK - begin TLS negotiation
               NO - security layer already active
               BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid

      A TLS negotiation begins immediately after the CRLF at the end of
      the tagged OK response from the server.  The STARTTLS command MAY
      be used in any state.  However, a NO response MAY result if a
      security layer is already active.  Once a client issues a STARTTLS
      command, it MUST NOT issue further commands until a server
      response is seen.

      If STARTTLS is issued in non-authenticated state, the server
      remains in non-authenticated state, even if client credentials are
      supplied during the TLS negotiation.  The SASL [SASL] EXTERNAL
      mechanism MAY be used to authenticate once TLS client credentials
      are successfully exchanged, but servers supporting the STARTTLS
      command are not required to support the EXTERNAL mechanism.

      Support for the TLS mechanism TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA is
      REQUIRED by all IMAP software implementing this extension.
      Implementations MUST NOT assume any other cipher suite is present.
      Unfortunately, it is possible that due to certain government
      export restrictions some non-compliant versions of this extension
      could be deployed.  Implementations wishing to interoperate with
      such non-compliant versions MAY offer the
      TLS_DHE_DSS_EXPORT_WITH_DES40_CBC_SHA mechanism.  However, since
      40 bit ciphers are known to be vulnerable to attack by current
      technology, any client which actives a 40 bit cipher MUST NOT
      indicate to the user that the connection is secure from
      evesdropping.

      The formal syntax for IMAP4 is amended as follows:

        command_any   =/  "STARTTLS"

   Example:    C: a001 CAPABILITY
               S: * CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 STARTTLS
               S: a001 OK CAPABILITY completed
               C: a002 STARTTLS
               S: a002 OK Begin TLS negotiation now
               <TLS negotation begins, futher commands sent under TLS layer>
               C: a003 LOGIN joe password



Newman                                                          [Page 3]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


               S: a003 OK LOGIN completed

3. New IMAP4 response codes

      This specification defines three new IMAP4 response codes which
      MAY be used to communicate server security policy to the client.
      These MAY be implemented independently of the STARTTLS command.


      ENCRYPT-NEEDED This occurs on a tagged NO response to an
                     AUTHENTICATE or LOGIN command and indicates that
                     the requested authentication mechanism is only
                     permitted underneath a security layer.  The client
                     MAY then issue the STARTTLS command and repeat the
                     same AUTHENTICATE or LOGIN command, or try an
                     AUTHENTICATE command with a stronger mechanism.
                     The client SHOULD record the fact that encryption
                     is needed for that user, server and mechanism
                     combination.

      AUTH-TOO-WEAK  This occurs on a tagged NO response to an
                     AUTHENTICATE or LOGIN command and indicates that
                     the mechanism is too weak and is no longer
                     permitted for that user by site policy.  This
                     allows a mechanism to be disabled on a per-user
                     rather than a per-server level which is useful if
                     different users have different security
                     requirements or for transitioning from plaintext
                     LOGIN to a more secure mechanism.  The client
                     SHOULD record the fact that the user, server and
                     mechanism combination is no longer permitted.

      TRANSITION-NEEDED
                     This occurs on a tagged NO response to an
                     AUTHENTICATE command.  It indicates that the server
                     has an entry for the specified user in a legacy
                     authentication database but does not yet have
                     credentials to offer the requested mechanism.  A
                     client which receives this error code MAY do a
                     one-time login using the LOGIN command or another
                     plaintext mechanism (preferably protected by the
                     STARTTLS command) to initialize credentials for the
                     requested mechanism.








Newman                                                          [Page 4]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


4. POP3 STARTTLS extension

   The POP3 STARTTLS extension adds the STLS command to POP3 servers.

      STLS

         Arguments: none

         Restrictions:
             MAY be given in any state, but MAY fail if a security layer
             is already active.

         Discussion:
             A TLS negotiation begins immediately after the CRLF at the
             end of the +OK response from the server.  A -ERR response
             MAY result if a security layer is already active.  Once a
             client issues a STLS command, it MUST NOT issue further
             commands until a server response is seen.

             If STLS is issued in authorization state, the server
             remains in authorization state, even if client credentials
             are supplied during the TLS negotiation.  The AUTH command
             [POP3-AUTH] with the EXTERNAL mechanism [SASL] MAY be used
             to authenticate once TLS client credentials are
             successfully exchanged, but servers supporting the STLS
             command are not required to support the EXTERNAL mechanism.

             Support for the TLS mechanism
             TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA is REQUIRED by all POP3
             software implementing this extension.  Implementations MUST
             NOT assume any other cipher suite is present.
             Unfortunately, it is possible that due to certain
             government export restrictions some non-compliant versions
             of this extension could be deployed.  Implementations
             wishing to interoperate with such non-compliant versions
             MAY offer the TLS_DHE_DSS_EXPORT_WITH_DES40_CBC_SHA
             mechanism.  However, since 40 bit ciphers are known to be
             vulnerable to attack by current technology, any client
             which actives a 40 bit cipher MUST NOT indicate to the user
             that the connection is secure from evesdropping.

         Possible Responses:
             +OK -ERR

         Examples:
             C: STLS
             S: +OK Begin TLS negotiation
             <TLS negotiation begins>



Newman                                                          [Page 5]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


               ...
             C: STLS
             S: -ERR Security Layer already active

5. POP3 response code extension

     POP3 is currently only capable of indicating success or failure to
     most commands.  Unfortunately, clients often need to know more
     information about the cause of a failure in order to gracefully
     recover.  The security policy response codes defined for IMAP in
     section 3 are a specific example of this.

     This specification amends the POP3 standard to permit an optional
     response code, enclosed in square brackets, at the beginning of the
     human readable text portion of a "+OK" or "-ERR" response.  Clients
     supporting this extension MAY remove any information enclosed in
     square brackets prior to displaying human readable text to the
     user.  Immediately following the open square bracket "[" character
     is a response code which is interpreted in a case-insensitive
     fashion by the client.

     The response code is hierarchical, with a "/" separating levels of
     detail about the error.  Clients MUST ignore unknown hierarchical
     detail about the response code.  This is important, as it could be
     necessary to provide further detail for response codes in the
     future.  For example, ENCRYPT-NEEDED/TLS and ENCRYPT-NEEDED/SSH
     might indicate a suggestion to use the TLS or SSH protocols
     respectively for encryption.

     Examples:
         C: USER mrose
         S: -ERR [ENCRYPT-NEEDED] You need to activate encryption before
                 logging in.


5.1. POP3 response codes

      This specification defines three new POP3 response codes which MAY
      be used to communicate server security policy to the client.
      These MAY be implemented independently of the STARTTLS extension.


      ENCRYPT-NEEDED This occurs on an -ERR response to an AUTH, USER or
                     APOP command and indicates that the requested
                     authentication mechanism is only permitted
                     underneath a security layer.  The client MAY then
                     issue the STLS command and repeat the same AUTH,
                     USER or APOP command or try an AUTH command with a



Newman                                                          [Page 6]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


                     stronger mechanism.  The client SHOULD record the
                     fact that encryption is needed for that user,
                     server and mechanism combination.

      AUTH-TOO-WEAK  This occurs on an -ERR response to an AUTH, USER or
                     APOP command and indicates that the mechanism is
                     too weak and is no longer permitted for that user
                     by site policy.  This allows a mechanism to be
                     disabled on a per-user rather than a per-server
                     level which is useful if different users have
                     different security requirements or for
                     transitioning from plaintext USER/PASS to a more
                     secure mechanism.  The client SHOULD record the
                     fact that the user, server and mechanism
                     combination is no longer permitted.

      TRANSITION-NEEDED
                     This occurs on an -ERR response to an AUTH or APOP
                     command.  It indicates that the server has an entry
                     for the specified user in a legacy authentication
                     database but does not yet have credentials to offer
                     the requested mechanism.  A client which receives
                     this error code MAY do a one-time login using the
                     USER/PASS commands or another plaintext mechanism
                     (preferably protected by the STLS command) to
                     initialize credentials for the requested mechanism.


6. imaps and pop3s ports

     Use of the registered "imaps" and "pop3s" ports is hereby strongly
     discouraged and considered non-standard behavior.


7. Security Considerations

     The mechanisms described in this document only apply to protecting
     a single connection.  Messages are still available to server
     administrators and usually subject to evesdropping, tampering and
     forgery when transmitted through SMTP or NNTP.  Protecting messages
     requires an object security mechanism such as PGP MIME [PGP-MIME].

     An active attacker for IMAP can remove STARTTLS from the IMAP
     CAPABILITY list, or cause the POP3 STLS command to fail with a
     message such as "-ERR Unknown command."  In order to detect such an
     attack, clients SHOULD either warn the user when session protection
     is not active, or be configurable to refuse to proceed without an
     acceptable level of security.



Newman                                                          [Page 7]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


     If a client uses a weak mechanism which sends the user name at the
     same time as the authentication credentials, such as IMAP4's LOGIN
     command, the ENCRYPT-NEEDED or AUTH-TOO-WEAK error codes will not
     prevent exposure.  For this reason, clients SHOULD record the fact
     that that user, server and mechanism combination is unacceptable to
     prevent future exposure or be configurable to try stronger
     mechanisms or activate encryption first.

     An active attacker could cause a bogus TRANSITION-NEEDED response
     to a stronger authentication mechanism.  For this reasons, clients
     SHOULD either activate TLS prior to authentication or get explicit
     permission from the user prior to using a plaintext mechanism for
     automated transition.

     An attacker might probe for users at a site by trying a strong
     authentication mechanism which could result in TRANSITION-NEEDED
     for some users.  Strong mechanisms can progress partway through
     negotiation prior to issuing the TRANSITION-NEEDED failure message
     in order to avoid this problem.

     An attacker might probe for users using the POP3 USER command to
     probe for AUTH-TOO-WEAK or ENCRYPT-NEEDED.  Server implementations
     could use these error codes for unknown users to defeat this
     attack.  Delaying the error until after the PASS command is
     supplied would unnecessarily reveal a user's password and thus
     would be a far more serious problem than probing for users.

     An active attacker can always cause a down-negotiation to the
     weakest authentication mechanism or cipher suite available.  For
     this reason, implementations need to be configurable to refuse weak
     mechanisms or cipher suites.


8. References

     [ABNF] Crocker, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", work
     in progress.

     [IMAIL] Crocker, D., "Standard for the Format of Arpa Internet Text
     Messages", RFC 822, University of Delaware, August 1982.

          <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc822.txt>

     [IMAP4] Crispin, M., "Internet Message Access Protocol - Version 4rev1",
     RFC 2060, University of Washington, December 1996.

         <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc2060.txt>




Newman                                                          [Page 8]


Internet Draft   Protecting IMAP4 and POP3 Connections       August 1997


     [IMAP-AUTH] Myers, J., "IMAP4 Authentication Mechanism", RFC 1731,
     Carnegie-Mellon University, December 1994.

         <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc1731.txt>

     [KEYWORDS] Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
     Levels", RFC 2119, Harvard University, March 1997.

         <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc2119.txt>

     [PGP-MIME] Elkins, M., "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP)",
     RFC 2015, The Aerospace Corporation, October 1996.

          <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc2015.txt>

     [POP3] Myers, J., Rose, M., "Post Office Protocol - Version 3", RFC
     1939, Carnegie Mellon, Dover Beach Consulting, Inc., May 1996.

             <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc1939.txt>

     [POP-AUTH] Myers, "POP3 AUTHentication command", RFC 1734, Carnegie
     Mellon, December 1994.

         <ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc1734.txt>

     [SASL] Myers, "Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL)", Work
     in progress.

     [TLS] Dierks, Allen, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0", Work in progress.


9. Author's Address

     Chris Newman
     Innosoft International, Inc.
     1050 Lakes Drive
     West Covina, CA 91790 USA

     Email: chris.newman@innosoft.com












Newman                                                          [Page 9]