GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc9155



Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Velvindron Request for Comments: 9155 cyberstorm.mu Updates: 5246 K. Moriarty Category: Standards Track CIS ISSN: 2070-1721 A. Ghedini

                                                       Cloudflare Inc.
                                                         December 2021
 Deprecating MD5 and SHA-1 Signature Hashes in TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2

Abstract

 The MD5 and SHA-1 hashing algorithms are increasingly vulnerable to
 attack, and this document deprecates their use in TLS 1.2 and DTLS
 1.2 digital signatures.  However, this document does not deprecate
 SHA-1 with Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC), as used in
 record protection.  This document updates RFC 5246.

Status of This Memo

 This is an Internet Standards Track document.
 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).  Further information on
 Internet Standards is available in 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/rfc9155.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2021 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.  Requirements Language
 2.  Signature Algorithms
 3.  Certificate Request
 4.  Server Key Exchange
 5.  Certificate Verify
 6.  IANA Considerations
 7.  Security Considerations
 8.  References
   8.1.  Normative References
   8.2.  Informative References
 Acknowledgements
 Authors' Addresses

1. Introduction

 The usage of MD5 and SHA-1 for signature hashing in (D)TLS 1.2 is
 specified in [RFC5246].  MD5 and SHA-1 have been proven to be
 insecure, subject to collision attacks [Wang].  In 2011, [RFC6151]
 detailed the security considerations, including collision attacks for
 MD5.  NIST formally deprecated use of SHA-1 in 2011
 [NISTSP800-131A-R2] and disallowed its use for digital signatures at
 the end of 2013, based on both the attack described in [Wang] and the
 potential for brute-force attack.  In 2016, researchers from the
 National Institute for Research in Digital Science and Technology
 (INRIA) identified a new class of transcript collision attacks on TLS
 (and other protocols) that relies on efficient collision-finding
 algorithms on the underlying hash constructions
 [Transcript-Collision].  Further, in 2017, researchers from Google
 and Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI) Amsterdam [SHA-1-Collision]
 proved SHA-1 collision attacks were practical.  This document updates
 [RFC5246] in such a way that MD5 and SHA-1 MUST NOT be used for
 digital signatures.  However, this document does not deprecate SHA-1
 with HMAC, as used in record protection.  Note that the CA/Browser
 Forum (CABF) has also deprecated use of SHA-1 for use in certificate
 signatures [CABF].

1.1. Requirements Language

 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.

2. Signature Algorithms

 Clients MUST include the signature_algorithms extension.  Clients
 MUST NOT include MD5 and SHA-1 in this extension.

3. Certificate Request

 Servers SHOULD NOT include MD5 and SHA-1 in CertificateRequest
 messages.

4. Server Key Exchange

 Servers MUST NOT include MD5 and SHA-1 in ServerKeyExchange messages.
 If the client receives a ServerKeyExchange message indicating MD5 or
 SHA-1, then it MUST abort the connection with an illegal_parameter
 alert.

5. Certificate Verify

 Clients MUST NOT include MD5 and SHA-1 in CertificateVerify messages.
 If a server receives a CertificateVerify message with MD5 or SHA-1,
 it MUST abort the connection with an illegal_parameter alert.

6. IANA Considerations

 IANA has updated the "TLS SignatureScheme" registry by changing the
 recommended status of SHA-1-based signature schemes to "N" (not
 recommended), as defined by [RFC8447].  The following entries have
 been updated; other entries in the registry remain the same.
    +========+================+=============+=====================+
    | Value  |  Description   | Recommended |      Reference      |
    +========+================+=============+=====================+
    | 0x0201 | rsa_pkcs1_sha1 |      N      | [RFC8446] [RFC9155] |
    +--------+----------------+-------------+---------------------+
    | 0x0203 |   ecdsa_sha1   |      N      | [RFC8446] [RFC9155] |
    +--------+----------------+-------------+---------------------+
                                Table 1
 IANA has also updated the reference for the "TLS SignatureAlgorithm"
 and "TLS HashAlgorithm" registries to refer to this document in
 addition to RFCs 5246 and 8447.

7. Security Considerations

 Concerns with (D)TLS 1.2 implementations falling back to SHA-1 is an
 issue.  This document updates the TLS 1.2 specification [RFC5246] to
 deprecate support for MD5 and SHA-1 for digital signatures.  However,
 this document does not deprecate SHA-1 with HMAC, as used in record
 protection.

8. References

8.1. 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>.
 [RFC5246]  Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
            (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>.
 [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>.
 [RFC8446]  Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
            Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
 [RFC8447]  Salowey, J. and S. Turner, "IANA Registry Updates for TLS
            and DTLS", RFC 8447, DOI 10.17487/RFC8447, August 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8447>.

8.2. Informative References

 [CABF]     CA/Browser Forum, "Ballot 118 -- SHA-1 Sunset (passed)",
            October 2014, <https://cabforum.org/2014/10/16/ballot-118-
            sha-1-sunset/>.
 [NISTSP800-131A-R2]
            Barker, E. and A. Roginsky, "Transitioning the Use of
            Cryptographic Algorithms and Key Lengths", NIST Special
            Publication 800-131A, Revision 2,
            DOI 10.6028/NIST.SP.800-131Ar2, March 2019,
            <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/
            NIST.SP.800-131Ar2.pdf>.
 [RFC6151]  Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations
            for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms",
            RFC 6151, DOI 10.17487/RFC6151, March 2011,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151>.
 [SHA-1-Collision]
            Stevens, M., Bursztein, E., Karpman, P., Albertini, A.,
            and Y. Markov, "The First Collision for Full SHA-1", 2017,
            <https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/190>.
 [Transcript-Collision]
            Bhargavan, K. and G. Leurent, "Transcript Collision
            Attacks: Breaking Authentication in TLS, IKE, and SSH",
            DOI 10.14722/ndss.2016.23418, February 2016,
            <https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01244855/document>.
 [Wang]     Wang, X., Yin, Y., and H. Yu, "Finding Collisions in the
            Full SHA-1", DOI 10.1007/11535218_2, 2005,
            <https://www.iacr.org/archive/
            crypto2005/36210017/36210017.pdf>.

Acknowledgements

 The authors would like to thank Hubert Kario for his help in writing
 the initial draft version of this document.  We are also grateful to
 Daniel Migault, Martin Thomson, Sean Turner, Christopher Wood, and
 David Cooper for their feedback.

Authors' Addresses

 Loganaden Velvindron
 cyberstorm.mu
 Rose Hill
 Mauritius
 Phone: +230 59762817
 Email: logan@cyberstorm.mu
 Kathleen Moriarty
 Center for Internet Security
 East Greenbush, NY
 United States of America
 Email: Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com
 Alessandro Ghedini
 Cloudflare Inc.
 Email: alessandro@cloudflare.com
/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc9155.txt · Last modified: 2021/12/20 17:20 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki