GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc8649

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Housley Request for Comments: 8649 Vigil Security Category: Informational August 2019 ISSN: 2070-1721

               Hash Of Root Key Certificate Extension

Abstract

 This document specifies the Hash Of Root Key certificate extension.
 This certificate extension is carried in the self-signed certificate
 for a trust anchor, which is often called a Root Certification
 Authority (CA) certificate.  This certificate extension unambiguously
 identifies the next public key that will be used at some point in the
 future as the next Root CA certificate, eventually replacing the
 current one.

Status of This Memo

 This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
 published for informational purposes.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
 approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet
 Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.
 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
 and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8649.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2019 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 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.

Housley Informational [Page 1] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

Table of Contents

 1. Introduction ....................................................2
    1.1. Terminology ................................................2
    1.2. ASN.1 ......................................................3
 2. Overview ........................................................3
 3. Hash Of Root Key Certificate Extension ..........................4
 4. IANA Considerations .............................................4
 5. Operational Considerations ......................................4
 6. Security Considerations .........................................6
 7. References ......................................................7
    7.1. Normative References .......................................7
    7.2. Informative References .....................................8
 Appendix A.  ASN.1 Module ..........................................9
 Acknowledgements ..................................................10
 Author's Address ..................................................10

1. Introduction

 This document specifies the Hash Of Root Key X.509 version 3
 certificate extension.  The extension is an optional addition to the
 Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate
 Revocation List (CRL) Profile [RFC5280].  The certificate extension
 facilitates the orderly transition from one Root Certification
 Authority (CA) public key to the next.  It does so by publishing the
 hash value of the next-generation public key in the current self-
 signed certificate.  This hash value is a commitment to a particular
 public key in the next-generation self-signed certificate.  This
 commitment allows a relying party to unambiguously recognize the
 next-generation self-signed certificate when it becomes available,
 install the new self-signed certificate in the trust anchor store,
 and eventually remove the previous one from the trust anchor store.
 A Root CA certificate MAY include the Hash Of Root Key certificate
 extension to provide the hash value of the next public key that will
 be used by the Root CA.

1.1. Terminology

 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.

Housley Informational [Page 2] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

1.2. ASN.1

 Certificates [RFC5280] use ASN.1 [X680]; Distinguished Encoding Rules
 (DER) [X690] are REQUIRED for certificate signing and validation.

2. Overview

 Before the initial deployment of the Root CA, the following are
 generated:
    R1 = The initial Root key pair
    R2 = The second-generation Root key pair
    H2 = Thumbprint (hash) of the public key of R2
    C1 = Self-signed certificate for R1, which also contains H2
 C1 is a self-signed certificate, and it contains H2 within the
 HashOfRootKey extension.  C1 is distributed as part of the initial
 system deployment.  The HashOfRootKey certificate extension is
 described in Section 3.
 When the time comes to replace the initial Root CA certificate, R1,
 the following are generated:
    R3 = The third-generation Root key pair
    H3 = Thumbprint (hash) the public key of R3
    C2 = Self-signed certificate for R2, which contains H3
 This is an iterative process.  That is, R4 and H4 are generated when
 it is time for C3 to replace C2, and so on.
 The successor to the Root CA self-signed certificate can be delivered
 by any means.  Whenever a new Root CA self-signed certificate is
 received, the recipient is able to verify that the potential Root CA
 certificate links back to a previously authenticated Root CA
 certificate with the HashOfRootKey certificate extension.  That is,
 the recipient verifies the signature on the self-signed certificate
 and verifies that the hash of the DER-encoded SubjectPublicKeyInfo
 from the potential Root CA certificate matches the value from the
 HashOfRootKey certificate extension of the current Root CA
 certificate.  Checking the self-signed certificate signature ensures
 that the certificate contains the subject name, public key algorithm
 identifier, and public key algorithm parameters intended by the key
 owner; these are important inputs to certification path validation as
 defined in Section 6 of [RFC5280].  Checking the hash of the
 SubjectPublicKeyInfo ensures that the certificate contains the
 intended public key.  If either check fails, then the potential Root
 CA certificate is not a valid replacement, and the recipient
 continues to use the current Root CA certificate.  If both checks

Housley Informational [Page 3] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

 succeed, then the recipient adds the potential Root CA certificate to
 the trust anchor store.  As discussed in Section 5, the recipient can
 remove the current Root CA certificate immediately in some
 situations.  In other situations, the recipient waits an appropriate
 amount of time to ensure that existing certification paths continue
 to validate.

3. Hash Of Root Key Certificate Extension

 The HashOfRootKey certificate extension MUST NOT be critical.
 The following ASN.1 [X680] [X690] syntax defines the HashOfRootKey
 certificate extension:
 ext-HashOfRootKey EXTENSION ::= {    -- Only in Root CA certificates
    SYNTAX         HashedRootKey
    IDENTIFIED BY  id-ce-hashOfRootKey
    CRITICALITY    {FALSE} }
 HashedRootKey ::= SEQUENCE {
    hashAlg        HashAlgorithm,        -- Hash algorithm used
    hashValue      OCTET STRING }        -- Hash of DER-encoded
                                         --   SubjectPublicKeyInfo
 id-ce-hashOfRootKey  ::=  OBJECT IDENTIFIER { 1 3 6 1 4 1 51483 2 1 }
 The definitions of EXTENSION and HashAlgorithm can be found in
 [RFC5912].
 The hashAlg indicates the one-way hash algorithm that was used to
 compute the hash value.
 The hashValue contains the hash value computed from the next-
 generation public key.  The public key is the DER-encoded
 SubjectPublicKeyInfo as defined in [RFC5280].

4. IANA Considerations

 This document has no IANA actions.

5. Operational Considerations

 Guidance on the transition from one root key to another is available
 in Section 4.4 of [RFC4210].  Of course, a root key is also known as
 a trust anchor.  In particular, the oldWithNew and newWithOld advice
 ensures that relying parties are able to validate certificates issued
 under the current Root CA certificate and the next-generation Root CA
 certificate throughout the transition.  The notAfter field in the

Housley Informational [Page 4] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

 oldWithNew certificate MUST cover the validity period of all
 unexpired certificates issued under the old Root CA private key.
 Further, this advice SHOULD be followed by Root CAs to avoid the need
 for all relying parties to make the transition at the same time.
 After issuing the newWithOld certificate, the Root CA MUST stop using
 the old private key to sign certificates.
 Some enterprise and application-specific environments offer a
 directory service or certificate repository to make certificate and
 CRLs available to relying parties.  Section 3 in [RFC5280] describes
 a certificate repository.  When a certificate repository is
 available, the oldWithNew and newWithOld certificates SHOULD be
 published before the successor to the current Root CA self-signed
 certificate is released.  Recipients that are able to obtain the
 oldWithNew certificate SHOULD immediately remove the old Root CA
 self-signed certificate from the trust anchor store.
 In environments without such a directory service or repository, like
 the Web PKI, recipients need a way to obtain the oldWithNew and
 newWithOld certificates.  The Root CA SHOULD include the subject
 information access extension [RFC5280] with the accessMethod set to
 id-ad-caRepository and the assessLocation set to the HTTP URL that
 can be used to fetch a DER-encoded "certs-only" (simple PKI response)
 message as specified in [RFC5272] in all of their self-signed
 certificates.  The Root CA SHOULD publish the "certs-only" message
 with the oldWithNew certificate and the newWithOld certificate before
 the subsequent Root CA self-signed certificate is released.  The
 "certs-only" message format allows certificates to be added and
 removed from the bag of certificates over time, so the same HTTP URL
 can be used throughout the lifetime of the Root CA.
 In environments without such a directory service or repository,
 recipients SHOULD keep both the old and replacement Root CA self-
 signed certificates in the trust anchor store for some amount of time
 to ensure that all end-entity certificates can be validated until
 they expire.  The recipient MAY keep the old Root CA self-signed
 certificate until all of the certificates in the local cache that are
 subordinate to it have expired.
 Certification path construction is more complex when the trust anchor
 store contains multiple self-signed certificates with the same
 distinguished name.  For this reason, the replacement Root CA self-
 signed certificate SHOULD contain a different distinguished name than
 the one it is replacing.  One approach is to include a number as part
 of the name that is incremented with each generation, such as
 "Example CA", "Example CA G2", "Example CA G3", and so on.

Housley Informational [Page 5] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

 Changing names from one generation to another can lead to confusion
 when reviewing the history of a trust anchor store.  To assist with
 such review, a recipient MAY create an audit entry to capture the old
 and replacement self-signed certificates.
 The Root CA must securely back up the yet-to-be-deployed key pair.
 If the Root CA stores the key pair in a hardware security module and
 that module fails, the Root CA remains committed to the key pair that
 is no longer available.  This leaves the Root CA with no alternative
 but to deploy a new self-signed certificate that contains a newly
 generated key pair in the same manner as the initial self-signed
 certificate, thus losing the benefits of the Hash Of Root Key
 certificate extension altogether.

6. Security Considerations

 The security considerations from [RFC5280] apply, especially the
 discussion of self-issued certificates.
 The Hash Of Root Key certificate extension facilitates the orderly
 transition from one Root CA public key to the next by publishing the
 hash value of the next-generation public key in the current
 certificate.  This allows a relying party to unambiguously recognize
 the next-generation public key when it becomes available; however,
 the full public key is not disclosed until the Root CA releases the
 next-generation certificate.  In this way, attackers cannot begin to
 analyze the public key before the next-generation Root CA self-signed
 certificate is released.
 The Root CA needs to ensure that the public key in the next-
 generation certificate is as strong or stronger than the key that it
 is replacing.  Of course, a significant advance in cryptoanalytic
 capability can break the yet-to-be-deployed key pair.  Such advances
 are rare and difficult to predict.  If such an advance occurs, the
 Root CA remains committed to the now broken key.  This leaves the
 Root CA with no alternative but to deploy a new self-signed
 certificate that contains a newly generated key pair, most likely
 using a different signature algorithm, in the same manner as the
 initial self-signed certificate, thus losing the benefits of the Hash
 Of Root Key certificate extension altogether.
 The Root CA needs to employ a hash function that is resistant to
 preimage attacks [RFC4270].  A first-preimage attack against the hash
 function would allow an attacker to find another input that results
 in the hash value of the next-generation public key that was
 published in the current certificate.  For the attack to be
 successful, the input would have to be a valid SubjectPublicKeyInfo
 that contains a public key that corresponds to a private key known to

Housley Informational [Page 6] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

 the attacker.  A second-preimage attack becomes possible once the
 Root CA releases the next-generation public key, which makes the
 input to the hash function available to the attacker and everyone
 else.  Again, the attacker needs to find a valid SubjectPublicKeyInfo
 that contains the public key that corresponds to a private key known
 to the attacker.  If the employed hash function is broken after the
 Root CA publishes the self-signed certificate with the HashOfRootKey
 certificate extension, an attacker would be able to trick the
 recipient into installing the incorrect next-generation certificate
 in the trust anchor store.
 If an early release of the next-generation public key occurs and the
 Root CA is concerned that attackers were given too much lead time to
 analyze that public key, then the Root CA can transition to a freshly
 generated key pair by rapidly performing two transitions.  After the
 first transition, the Root CA is using the key pair that suffered the
 early release, and that transition causes the Root CA to generate the
 subsequent Root key pair.  The second transition occurs when the Root
 CA is confident that the population of relying parties has completed
 the first transition, and it takes the Root CA to the freshly
 generated key pair.  Of course, the second transition also causes the
 Root CA to generate another key pair that is reserved for future use.
 Queries for the CRLs associated with certificates that are
 subordinate to the self-signed certificate can give some indication
 of the number of relying parties that are still actively using the
 self-signed certificates.

7. References

7.1. 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,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
 [RFC4210]  Adams, C., Farrell, S., Kause, T., and T. Mononen,
            "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate
            Management Protocol (CMP)", RFC 4210,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC4210, September 2005,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4210>.
 [RFC4270]  Hoffman, P. and B. Schneier, "Attacks on Cryptographic
            Hashes in Internet Protocols", RFC 4270,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC4270, November 2005,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4270>.

Housley Informational [Page 7] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

 [RFC5272]  Schaad, J. and M. Myers, "Certificate Management over CMS
            (CMC)", RFC 5272, DOI 10.17487/RFC5272, June 2008,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5272>.
 [RFC5280]  Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
            Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
            Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
            (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.
 [RFC5912]  Hoffman, P. and J. Schaad, "New ASN.1 Modules for the
            Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509 (PKIX)", RFC 5912,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC5912, June 2010,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5912>.
 [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
            2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
            May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
 [X680]     ITU-T, "Information technology -- Abstract Syntax Notation
            One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation",
            ITU-T Recommendation X.680, August 2015.
 [X690]     ITU-T, "Information Technology -- ASN.1 encoding rules:
            Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical
            Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules
            (DER)", ITU-T Recommendation X.690, August 2015.

7.2. Informative References

 [SET]      MasterCard and VISA, "SET Secure Electronic Transaction
            Specification -- Book 2: Programmer's Guide, Version 1.0",
            May 1997.

Housley Informational [Page 8] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

Appendix A. ASN.1 Module

 The following ASN.1 module provides the complete definition of the
 HashOfRootKey certificate extension.
 <CODE BEGINS>
 HashedRootKeyCertExtn { 1 3 6 1 4 1 51483 0 1 }
 DEFINITIONS IMPLICIT TAGS ::=
 BEGIN
  1. - EXPORTS All
 IMPORTS
 HashAlgorithm
   FROM PKIX1-PSS-OAEP-Algorithms-2009  -- RFC 5912
        { iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
          security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) id-mod(0)
          id-mod-pkix1-rsa-pkalgs-02(54) }
 EXTENSION
   FROM PKIX-CommonTypes-2009  -- RFC 5912
     { iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
       security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) id-mod(0)
       id-mod-pkixCommon-02(57) } ;
  1. -
  2. - Expand the certificate extensions list in RFC 5912
  3. -
 CertExtensions EXTENSION ::= {
    ext-HashOfRootKey, ... }
  1. -
  2. - HashOfRootKey Certificate Extension
  3. -
 ext-HashOfRootKey EXTENSION ::= {    -- Only in Root CA certificates
    SYNTAX         HashedRootKey
    IDENTIFIED BY  id-ce-hashOfRootKey
    CRITICALITY    {FALSE} }
 HashedRootKey  ::=  SEQUENCE {
    hashAlg        HashAlgorithm,     -- Hash algorithm used
    hashValue      OCTET STRING }     -- Hash of DER-encoded
                                      --   SubjectPublicKeyInfo

Housley Informational [Page 9] RFC 8649 Hash Of Root Key Extension August 2019

 id-ce-hashOfRootKey OBJECT IDENTIFIER  ::=  { 1 3 6 1 4 1 51483 2 1 }
 END
 <CODE ENDS>

Acknowledgements

 The Secure Electronic Transaction (SET) [SET] specification published
 by MasterCard and VISA in 1997 includes a very similar certificate
 extension.  The SET certificate extension has essentially the same
 semantics, but the syntax fairly different.
 CTIA - The Wireless Association - is developing a public key
 infrastructure that will make use of the certificate extension
 described in this document; the object identifiers used in the ASN.1
 module were assigned by CTIA.
 Many thanks to Stefan Santesson, Jim Schaad, Daniel Kahn Gillmor,
 Joel Halpern, Paul Hoffman, Rich Salz, and Ben Kaduk.  Their reviews
 and comments greatly improved the document, especially the
 "Operational Considerations" and "Security Considerations" sections.

Author's Address

 Russ Housley
 Vigil Security
 516 Dranesville Road
 Herndon, VA  20170
 United States of America
 Email: housley@vigilsec.com

Housley Informational [Page 10]

/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc8649.txt · Last modified: 2019/08/26 19:02 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki