From e6a2301cdab67d2b973bd7c847250023717cf0c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ID Bot Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 22:22:59 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Script updating gh-pages from 210b0a7. [ci skip] --- .../draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.html | 1552 +++++++++++++++++ .../draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.txt | 327 ++++ draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/index.html | 45 + index.html | 8 + 4 files changed, 1932 insertions(+) create mode 100644 draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.html create mode 100644 draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.txt create mode 100644 draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/index.html diff --git a/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.html b/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6ccddca --- /dev/null +++ b/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.html @@ -0,0 +1,1552 @@ + + + + + + +COSE Hash Envelope + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Internet-DraftCOSE Hash EnvelopeAugust 2024
Steele, et al.Expires 16 February 2025[Page]
+
+
+
+
Workgroup:
+
Network Working Group
+
Internet-Draft:
+
draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-latest
+
Published:
+
+ +
+
Intended Status:
+
Standards Track
+
Expires:
+
+
Authors:
+
+
+
O. Steele
+
Transmute
+
+
+
S. Lasker
+
DataTrails
+
+
+
H. Birkholz
+
Fraunhofer SIT
+
+
+
+
+

COSE Hash Envelope

+
+

Abstract

+

This document defines new COSE header parameters for signaling a payload as an output of a hash function. +This mechanism enables faster validation as access to the original payload is not required for signature validation. +Additionally, hints of the detached payload's content format and availability are defined providing references to optional discovery mechanisms that can help to find original payload content.

+
+
+

+About This Document +

+

This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

+

+ The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://cose-wg.github.io/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.html. + Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope/.

+

+ Discussion of this document takes place on the + CBOR Object Signing and Encryption Working Group mailing list (mailto:cose@ietf.org), + which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cose/. + Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose/.

+

Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at + https://github.com/cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.

+
+
+
+

+Status of This Memo +

+

+ This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the + provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

+

+ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task + Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working + documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is + at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

+

+ Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months + and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any + time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference + material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

+

+ This Internet-Draft will expire on 16 February 2025.

+
+
+ +
+
+ ▲

+Table of Contents +

+ +
+
+
+
+

+1. Introduction +

+

COSE defined detached payloads in Section 2 of [RFC9052], using nil as the payload. +In order to verify a signature over a detached payload, the verifier must have access to the payload content. +Storing a hash of the content allows for small signature envelopes, that are easy to transport and verify independently.

+

Additional hints in the protected header ensure cryptographic agility for the hashing & signing algorithms, and discoverability for the original content which could be prohibitively large to move over a network.

+
+
+

+1.1. Attached Payload +

+

COSE_sign1 envelope with an attached payload, providing for signature validation.

+
+
+18(                                 / COSE Sign 1                   /
+    [
+      h'a4013822...3a616263',       / Protected                     /
+      {}                            / Unprotected                   /
+      h'317cedc7...c494e772',       / Payload                       /
+      h'15280897...93ef39e5'        / Signature                     /
+    ]
+)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+1.2. Detached Payload +

+

COSE_sign1 envelope with a detached payload (nil), which is compact but the payload must be distributed out of band to validate the signature

+
+
+18(                                 / COSE Sign 1                   /
+    [
+      h'a4013822...3a616263',       / Protected                     /
+      {}                            / Unprotected                   /
+      nil,                          / Detached Payload              /
+      h'15280897...93ef39e5'        / Signature                     /
+    ]
+)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+1.3. Hashed Payload +

+

A hashed payload functions equivalently to an attached payload, with the benefits of being compact in size and providing the ability to validate the signature.

+
+
+18(                                 / COSE Sign 1                   /
+    [
+      h'a4013822...3a616263',       / Protected                     /
+      {}                            / Unprotected                   /
+      h'935b5a91...e18a588a',       / Payload                       /
+      h'15280897...93ef39e5'        / Signature                     /
+    ]
+)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+2. Header Parameters +

+

To represent a hash of a payload, the following headers are defined:

+
+
TBD_1:
+
+

the hash algorithm used to generate the hash of the payload

+
+
+
TBD_2:
+
+

the content type of the payload the hash represents

+
+
+
TBD_3:
+
+

an identifier enabling a verifier to retrieve the full payload preimage.

+
+
+
+
+
+

+2.1. Signed Hash Envelopes Example +

+
+
+Hash_Envelope_Protected_Header = {
+    ; Cryptographic algorithm to use
+    ? &(alg: 1) => int,
+
+    ; Type of the envelope
+    ? &(typ: 16) => int / tstr
+
+    ; Hash algorithm used to produce the payload from content
+    ; -16 for SHA-256,
+    ; See https://www.iana.org/assignments/cose/cose.xhtml
+    &(payload_hash_alg: TBD_1) => int
+
+    ; Content type of the preimage
+    ; (content to be hashed) of the payload
+    ; 50 for application/json,
+    ; See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7252#section-12.3
+    &(payload_preimage_content_type: TBD_2) => int
+
+    ; Location the content of the hashed payload is stored
+    ; For example:
+    ; storage.example/244f...9c19
+    ? &(payload_location: TBD_3) => tstr
+
+    * int => any
+}
+
+Hash_Envelope_Unprotected_Header = {
+    * int => any
+}
+
+Hash_Envelope_as_COSE_Sign1 = [
+    protected : bstr .cbor Hash_Envelope_Protected_Header,
+    unprotected : Hash_Envelope_Unprotected_Header,
+    payload: bstr / nil,
+    signature : bstr
+]
+
+Hash_Envelope = #6.18(Hash_Envelope_as_COSE_Sign1)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+2.2. Protected Header +

+

16 (typ), TBD_1 (payload hash alg) and TBD_2 (content type of the preimage of the payload) MUST be present in the protected header and MUST NOT be present in the unprotected header. +TBD_3 (payload_location) MAY be added to the protected header and MUST NOT be presented in the unprotected header.

+

For example:

+
+
+{
+  / alg : ES384 / 1: -35,
+  / kid / 4: h'75726e3a...32636573',
+  / typ / 16: application/hashed+cose
+  / payload_hash_alg sha-256 / TBD_1: 1
+  / payload_preimage_content_type / TBD_2: application/jwk+json
+  / payload_location / TBD_3 : storage.example/244f...9c19
+}
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+3. Encrypted Hashes +

+

Should we define this?

+
+
+
+
+

+4. Security Considerations +

+

TODO Security

+
+
+

+4.1. Choice of Hash Function +

+

It is RECOMMENDED to align the strength of the chosen hash function to the strength of the chosen signature algorithm. +For example, when signing with ECDSA using P-256 and SHA-256, use SHA-256 to hash the payload.

+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+5. IANA Considerations +

+
+
+

+5.1. Requirements Notation +

+

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", +"MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as +described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they +appear in all capitals, as shown here.

+
+
+
+
+

+5.2. COSE Header Algorithm Parameters +

+
    +
  • +

    Name: payload hash algorithm

    +
    • +
  • +

    Label: TBD_1

    +
    • +
  • +

    Value type: int

    +
    • +
  • +

    Value registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/named-information/named-information.xhtml

    +
    • +
  • +

    Description: Hash algorithm used to produce the payload.

    +
    • +
+
+
+
+
+

+5.3. Named Information Hash Algorithm Registry +

+
    +
  • +

    Name: SHAKE256

    +
    • +
  • +

    Label: TBD_2

    +
    • +
  • +

    Value type: int

    +
    • +
  • +

    Value registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/named-information/named-information.xhtml

    +
    • +
  • +

    Description: SHAKE256 a described in https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/NIST.FIPS.202.pdf

    +
    • +
  • +

    Name: ASCON128

    +
    • +
  • +

    Label: TBD_3

    +
    • +
  • +

    Value type: int

    +
    • +
  • +

    Value registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/named-information/named-information.xhtml

    +
    • +
  • +

    Description: ASCON128 a described in https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/lightweight-cryptography/documents/round-2/spec-doc-rnd2/ascon-spec-round2.pdf

    +
    • +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+6. Normative References +

+
+
[RFC2119]
+
+Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
+
+
[RFC8174]
+
+Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
+
+
[RFC9052]
+
+Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Structures and Process", STD 96, RFC 9052, DOI 10.17487/RFC9052, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9052>.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+Acknowledgments +

+

The following individuals provided input into the final form of the document: Carsten Bormann, Henk Birkholz, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud, Cedric Fournet.

+
+
+
+
+

+Authors' Addresses +

+
+
Orie Steele
+
Transmute
+ +
+
+
Steve Lasker
+
DataTrails
+ +
+
+
Henk Birkholz
+
Fraunhofer SIT
+
Rheinstrasse 75
+
+64295 Darmstadt +
+
Germany
+ +
+
+
+ + + diff --git a/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.txt b/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1c6a22d --- /dev/null +++ b/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope.txt @@ -0,0 +1,327 @@ + + + + +Network Working Group O. Steele +Internet-Draft Transmute +Intended status: Standards Track S. Lasker +Expires: 16 February 2025 DataTrails + H. Birkholz + Fraunhofer SIT + 15 August 2024 + + + COSE Hash Envelope + draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-latest + +Abstract + + This document defines new COSE header parameters for signaling a + payload as an output of a hash function. This mechanism enables + faster validation as access to the original payload is not required + for signature validation. Additionally, hints of the detached + payload's content format and availability are defined providing + references to optional discovery mechanisms that can help to find + original payload content. + +About This Document + + This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. + + The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://cose- + wg.github.io/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope/draft-ietf-cose-hash- + envelope.html. Status information for this document may be found at + https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope/. + + Discussion of this document takes place on the CBOR Object Signing + and Encryption Working Group mailing list (mailto:cose@ietf.org), + which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cose/. + Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose/. + + Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at + https://github.com/cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope. + +Status of This Memo + + This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the + provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. + + Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering + Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute + working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- + Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. + + Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months + and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any + time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference + material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." + + This Internet-Draft will expire on 16 February 2025. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + document authors. All rights reserved. + + This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal + Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ + license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. + Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights + and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components + extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as + described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are + provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction + 1.1. Attached Payload + 1.2. Detached Payload + 1.3. Hashed Payload + 2. Header Parameters + 2.1. Signed Hash Envelopes Example + 2.2. Protected Header + 3. Encrypted Hashes + 4. Security Considerations + 4.1. Choice of Hash Function + 5. IANA Considerations + 5.1. Requirements Notation + 5.2. COSE Header Algorithm Parameters + 5.3. Named Information Hash Algorithm Registry + 6. Normative References + Acknowledgments + Authors' Addresses + +1. Introduction + + COSE defined detached payloads in Section 2 of [RFC9052], using nil + as the payload. In order to verify a signature over a detached + payload, the verifier must have access to the payload content. + Storing a hash of the content allows for small signature envelopes, + that are easy to transport and verify independently. + + Additional hints in the protected header ensure cryptographic agility + for the hashing & signing algorithms, and discoverability for the + original content which could be prohibitively large to move over a + network. + +1.1. Attached Payload + + COSE_sign1 envelope with an attached payload, providing for signature + validation. + + 18( / COSE Sign 1 / + [ + h'a4013822...3a616263', / Protected / + {} / Unprotected / + h'317cedc7...c494e772', / Payload / + h'15280897...93ef39e5' / Signature / + ] + ) + +1.2. Detached Payload + + COSE_sign1 envelope with a detached payload (nil), which is compact + but the payload must be distributed out of band to validate the + signature + + 18( / COSE Sign 1 / + [ + h'a4013822...3a616263', / Protected / + {} / Unprotected / + nil, / Detached Payload / + h'15280897...93ef39e5' / Signature / + ] + ) + +1.3. Hashed Payload + + A hashed payload functions equivalently to an attached payload, with + the benefits of being compact in size and providing the ability to + validate the signature. + + 18( / COSE Sign 1 / + [ + h'a4013822...3a616263', / Protected / + {} / Unprotected / + h'935b5a91...e18a588a', / Payload / + h'15280897...93ef39e5' / Signature / + ] + ) + +2. Header Parameters + + To represent a hash of a payload, the following headers are defined: + + TBD_1: the hash algorithm used to generate the hash of the payload + + TBD_2: the content type of the payload the hash represents + + TBD_3: an identifier enabling a verifier to retrieve the full + payload preimage. + +2.1. Signed Hash Envelopes Example + + Hash_Envelope_Protected_Header = { + ; Cryptographic algorithm to use + ? &(alg: 1) => int, + + ; Type of the envelope + ? &(typ: 16) => int / tstr + + ; Hash algorithm used to produce the payload from content + ; -16 for SHA-256, + ; See https://www.iana.org/assignments/cose/cose.xhtml + &(payload_hash_alg: TBD_1) => int + + ; Content type of the preimage + ; (content to be hashed) of the payload + ; 50 for application/json, + ; See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7252#section-12.3 + &(payload_preimage_content_type: TBD_2) => int + + ; Location the content of the hashed payload is stored + ; For example: + ; storage.example/244f...9c19 + ? &(payload_location: TBD_3) => tstr + + * int => any + } + + Hash_Envelope_Unprotected_Header = { + * int => any + } + + Hash_Envelope_as_COSE_Sign1 = [ + protected : bstr .cbor Hash_Envelope_Protected_Header, + unprotected : Hash_Envelope_Unprotected_Header, + payload: bstr / nil, + signature : bstr + ] + + Hash_Envelope = #6.18(Hash_Envelope_as_COSE_Sign1) + +2.2. Protected Header + + 16 (typ), TBD_1 (payload hash alg) and TBD_2 (content type of the + preimage of the payload) MUST be present in the protected header and + MUST NOT be present in the unprotected header. TBD_3 + (payload_location) MAY be added to the protected header and MUST NOT + be presented in the unprotected header. + + For example: + + { + / alg : ES384 / 1: -35, + / kid / 4: h'75726e3a...32636573', + / typ / 16: application/hashed+cose + / payload_hash_alg sha-256 / TBD_1: 1 + / payload_preimage_content_type / TBD_2: application/jwk+json + / payload_location / TBD_3 : storage.example/244f...9c19 + } + +3. Encrypted Hashes + + Should we define this? + +4. Security Considerations + + TODO Security + +4.1. Choice of Hash Function + + It is RECOMMENDED to align the strength of the chosen hash function + to the strength of the chosen signature algorithm. For example, when + signing with ECDSA using P-256 and SHA-256, use SHA-256 to hash the + payload. + +5. IANA Considerations + +5.1. Requirements Notation + + The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and + "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in + BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all + capitals, as shown here. + +5.2. COSE Header Algorithm Parameters + + * Name: payload hash algorithm + + * Label: TBD_1 + + * Value type: int + + * Value registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/named- + information/named-information.xhtml + + * Description: Hash algorithm used to produce the payload. + +5.3. Named Information Hash Algorithm Registry + + * Name: SHAKE256 + + * Label: TBD_2 + + * Value type: int + + * Value registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/named- + information/named-information.xhtml + + * Description: SHAKE256 a described in + https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/NIST.FIPS.202.pdf + + * Name: ASCON128 + + * Label: TBD_3 + + * Value type: int + + * Value registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/named- + information/named-information.xhtml + + * Description: ASCON128 a described in + https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/lightweight- + cryptography/documents/round-2/spec-doc-rnd2/ascon-spec-round2.pdf + +6. Normative References + + [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate + Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, + DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, + . + + [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC + 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, + May 2017, . + + [RFC9052] Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): + Structures and Process", STD 96, RFC 9052, + DOI 10.17487/RFC9052, August 2022, + . + +Acknowledgments + + The following individuals provided input into the final form of the + document: Carsten Bormann, Henk Birkholz, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud, + Cedric Fournet. + +Authors' Addresses + + Orie Steele + Transmute + Email: orie@transmute.industries + + + Steve Lasker + DataTrails + Email: steve.lasker@datatrails.ai + + + Henk Birkholz + Fraunhofer SIT + Rheinstrasse 75 + 64295 Darmstadt + Germany + Email: henk.birkholz@ietf.contact diff --git a/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/index.html b/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/index.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..645f25b --- /dev/null +++ b/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00/index.html @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ + + + + cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00 preview + + + + +

Editor's drafts for draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00 branch of cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope

+ + + + + + +
COSE Hash Envelopeplain textsame as main
+ + + diff --git a/index.html b/index.html index 17b88b5..cc6d3a1 100644 --- a/index.html +++ b/index.html @@ -48,6 +48,14 @@

Preview for branch issue-15-opt-b

diff with main +

Preview for branch draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-00

+ + + + + + +
COSE Hash Envelopeplain textsame as main

Preview for branch issue-15-opt-a