GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc9185



Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) P. Jones Request for Comments: 9185 Cisco Systems Category: Informational P. Ellenbogen ISSN: 2070-1721 Princeton University

                                                           N. Ohlmeier
                                                             8x8, Inc.
                                                            April 2022
   DTLS Tunnel between a Media Distributor and Key Distributor to
                      Facilitate Key Exchange

Abstract

 This document defines a protocol for tunneling DTLS traffic in
 multimedia conferences that enables a Media Distributor to facilitate
 key exchange between an endpoint in a conference and the Key
 Distributor.  The protocol is designed to ensure that the keying
 material used for hop-by-hop encryption and authentication is
 accessible to the Media Distributor, while the keying material used
 for end-to-end encryption and authentication is inaccessible to the
 Media Distributor.

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/rfc9185.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2022 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
 2.  Conventions Used in This Document
 3.  Tunneling Concept
 4.  Example Message Flows
 5.  Tunneling Procedures
   5.1.  Endpoint Procedures
   5.2.  Tunnel Establishment Procedures
   5.3.  Media Distributor Tunneling Procedures
   5.4.  Key Distributor Tunneling Procedures
   5.5.  Versioning Considerations
 6.  Tunneling Protocol
   6.1.  TunnelMessage Structure
   6.2.  SupportedProfiles Message
   6.3.  UnsupportedVersion Message
   6.4.  MediaKeys Message
   6.5.  TunneledDtls Message
   6.6.  EndpointDisconnect Message
 7.  Example Binary Encoding
 8.  IANA Considerations
 9.  Security Considerations
 10. References
   10.1.  Normative References
   10.2.  Informative References
 Acknowledgements
 Authors' Addresses

1. Introduction

 An objective of Privacy-Enhanced RTP Conferencing (PERC) [RFC8871] is
 to ensure that endpoints in a multimedia conference have access to
 the end-to-end (E2E) and hop-by-hop (HBH) keying material used to
 encrypt and authenticate Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) packets
 [RFC3550], while the Media Distributor has access only to the HBH
 keying material for encryption and authentication.
 This specification defines a tunneling protocol that enables the
 Media Distributor to tunnel DTLS messages [RFC9147] between an
 endpoint and a Key Distributor, thus allowing an endpoint to use DTLS
 for the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (DTLS-SRTP) [RFC5764] for
 establishing encryption and authentication keys with the Key
 Distributor.
 The tunnel established between the Media Distributor and Key
 Distributor is a TLS connection [RFC8446] that is established before
 any messages are forwarded by the Media Distributor on behalf of
 endpoints.  DTLS packets received from an endpoint are encapsulated
 by the Media Distributor inside this tunnel as data to be sent to the
 Key Distributor.  Likewise, when the Media Distributor receives data
 from the Key Distributor over the tunnel, it extracts the DTLS
 message inside and forwards the DTLS message to the endpoint.  In
 this way, the DTLS association for the DTLS-SRTP procedures is
 established between an endpoint and the Key Distributor, with the
 Media Distributor forwarding DTLS messages between the two entities
 via the established tunnel to the Key Distributor and having no
 visibility into the confidential information exchanged.
 Following the existing DTLS-SRTP procedures, the endpoint and Key
 Distributor will arrive at a selected cipher and keying material,
 which are used for HBH encryption and authentication by both the
 endpoint and the Media Distributor.  However, since the Media
 Distributor would not have direct access to this information, the Key
 Distributor explicitly shares the HBH key information with the Media
 Distributor via the tunneling protocol defined in this document.
 Additionally, the endpoint and Key Distributor will agree on a cipher
 for E2E encryption and authentication.  The Key Distributor will
 transmit keying material to the endpoint for E2E operations but will
 not share that information with the Media Distributor.
 By establishing this TLS tunnel between the Media Distributor and Key
 Distributor and implementing the protocol defined in this document,
 it is possible for the Media Distributor to facilitate the
 establishment of a secure DTLS association between an endpoint and
 the Key Distributor in order for the endpoint to generate E2E and HBH
 keying material.  At the same time, the Key Distributor can securely
 provide the HBH keying material to the Media Distributor.

2. Conventions Used in This Document

 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.
 This document uses the terms "endpoint", "Media Distributor", and
 "Key Distributor" defined in [RFC8871].

3. Tunneling Concept

 A TLS connection (tunnel) is established between the Media
 Distributor and the Key Distributor.  This tunnel is used to relay
 DTLS messages between the endpoint and Key Distributor, as depicted
 in Figure 1:
                            +-------------+
                            |     Key     |
                            | Distributor |
                            +-------------+
                                # ^ ^ #
                                # | | # <-- TLS Tunnel
                                # | | #
   +----------+             +-------------+             +----------+
   |          |     DTLS    |             |    DTLS     |          |
   | Endpoint |<------------|    Media    |------------>| Endpoint |
   |          |    to Key   | Distributor |   to Key    |          |
   |          | Distributor |             | Distributor |          |
   +----------+             +-------------+             +----------+
                Figure 1: TLS Tunnel to Key Distributor
 The three entities involved in this communication flow are the
 endpoint, the Media Distributor, and the Key Distributor.  The
 behavior of each entity is described in Section 5.
 The Key Distributor is a logical function that might be co-resident
 with a key management server operated by an enterprise, might reside
 in one of the endpoints participating in the conference, or might
 reside at some other location that is trusted with E2E keying
 material.

4. Example Message Flows

 This section provides an example message flow to help clarify the
 procedures described later in this document.  It is necessary that
 the Key Distributor and Media Distributor establish a mutually
 authenticated TLS connection for the purpose of sending tunneled
 messages, though the complete TLS handshake for the tunnel is not
 shown in Figure 2 because there is nothing new this document
 introduces with regard to those procedures.
 Once the tunnel is established, it is possible for the Media
 Distributor to relay the DTLS messages between the endpoint and the
 Key Distributor.  Figure 2 shows a message flow wherein the endpoint
 uses DTLS-SRTP to establish an association with the Key Distributor.
 In the process, the Media Distributor shares its supported SRTP
 protection profile information (see [RFC5764]), and the Key
 Distributor shares the HBH keying material and selected cipher with
 the Media Distributor.
   Endpoint              Media Distributor          Key Distributor
       |                         |                         |
       |                         |<=======================>|
       |                         |    TLS Connection Made  |
       |                         |                         |
       |                         |========================>|
       |                         | SupportedProfiles       |
       |                         |                         |
       |------------------------>|========================>|
       | DTLS handshake message  | TunneledDtls            |
       |                         |                         |
            .... may be multiple handshake messages ...
       |                         |                         |
       |<------------------------|<========================|
       | DTLS handshake message  |            TunneledDtls |
       |                         |                         |
       |                         |                         |
       |                         |<========================|
       |                         |               MediaKeys |
           Figure 2: Sample DTLS-SRTP Exchange via the Tunnel
 After the initial TLS connection has been established, each of the
 messages on the right-hand side of Figure 2 is a tunneling protocol
 message, as defined in Section 6.
 SRTP protection profiles supported by the Media Distributor will be
 sent in a SupportedProfiles message when the TLS tunnel is initially
 established.  The Key Distributor will use that information to select
 a common profile supported by both the endpoint and the Media
 Distributor to ensure that HBH operations can be successfully
 performed.
 As DTLS messages are received from the endpoint by the Media
 Distributor, they are forwarded to the Key Distributor encapsulated
 inside a TunneledDtls message.  Likewise, as TunneledDtls messages
 are received by the Media Distributor from the Key Distributor, the
 encapsulated DTLS packet is forwarded to the endpoint.
 The Key Distributor will provide the SRTP keying material [RFC3711]
 to the Media Distributor for HBH operations via the MediaKeys
 message.  The Media Distributor will extract this keying material
 from the MediaKeys message when received and use it for HBH
 encryption and authentication.

5. Tunneling Procedures

 The following subsections explain in detail the expected behavior of
 the endpoint, the Media Distributor, and the Key Distributor.
 It is important to note that the tunneling protocol described in this
 document is not an extension to TLS or DTLS.  Rather, it is a
 protocol that transports DTLS messages generated by an endpoint or
 Key Distributor as data inside of the TLS connection established
 between the Media Distributor and Key Distributor.

5.1. Endpoint Procedures

 The endpoint follows the procedures outlined for DTLS-SRTP [RFC5764]
 in order to establish the cipher and keys used for encryption and
 authentication, with the endpoint acting as the client and the Key
 Distributor acting as the server.  The endpoint does not need to be
 aware of the fact that DTLS messages it transmits toward the Media
 Distributor are being tunneled to the Key Distributor.
 The endpoint MUST include a unique identifier in the tls-id Session
 Description Protocol (SDP) attribute [RFC8866] in all offer and
 answer messages [RFC3264] that it generates, as per [RFC8842].
 Further, the endpoint MUST include this same unique identifier in the
 external_session_id extension [RFC8844] in the ClientHello message
 when establishing a DTLS association.
 When receiving an external_session_id value from the Key Distributor,
 the client MUST check to ensure that value matches the tls-id value
 received in SDP.  If the values do not match, the endpoint MUST
 consider any received keying material to be invalid and terminate the
 DTLS association.

5.2. Tunnel Establishment Procedures

 Either the Media Distributor or Key Distributor initiates the
 establishment of a TLS tunnel.  Which entity acts as the TLS client
 when establishing the tunnel and what event triggers the
 establishment of the tunnel are outside the scope of this document.
 Further, how the trust relationships are established between the Key
 Distributor and Media Distributor are also outside the scope of this
 document.
 A tunnel MUST be a mutually authenticated TLS connection.
 The Media Distributor or Key Distributor MUST establish a tunnel
 prior to forwarding tunneled DTLS messages.  Given the time-sensitive
 nature of DTLS-SRTP procedures, a tunnel SHOULD be established prior
 to the Media Distributor receiving a DTLS message from an endpoint.
 A single tunnel MAY be used to relay DTLS messages between any number
 of endpoints and the Key Distributor.
 A Media Distributor MAY have more than one tunnel established between
 itself and one or more Key Distributors.  When multiple tunnels are
 established, which tunnel or tunnels to use to send messages for a
 given conference is outside the scope of this document.

5.3. Media Distributor Tunneling Procedures

 The first message transmitted over the tunnel is the
 SupportedProfiles message (see Section 6).  This message informs the
 Key Distributor about which DTLS-SRTP profiles the Media Distributor
 supports.  This message MUST be sent each time a new tunnel
 connection is established or, in the case of connection loss, when a
 connection is re-established.  The Media Distributor MUST support the
 same list of protection profiles for the duration of any endpoint-
 initiated DTLS association and tunnel connection.
 The Media Distributor MUST assign a unique association identifier for
 each endpoint-initiated DTLS association and include it in all
 messages forwarded to the Key Distributor.  The Key Distributor will
 subsequently include this identifier in all messages it sends so that
 the Media Distributor can map messages received via a tunnel and
 forward those messages to the correct endpoint.  The association
 identifier MUST be a version 4 Universally Unique Identifier (UUID),
 as described in Section 4.4 of [RFC4122].
 When a DTLS message is received by the Media Distributor from an
 endpoint, it forwards the UDP payload portion of that message to the
 Key Distributor encapsulated in a TunneledDtls message.  The Media
 Distributor is not required to forward all messages received from an
 endpoint for a given DTLS association through the same tunnel if more
 than one tunnel has been established between it and a Key
 Distributor.
 When a MediaKeys message is received, the Media Distributor MUST
 extract the cipher and keying material conveyed in order to
 subsequently perform HBH encryption and authentication operations for
 RTP and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets sent between it and an
 endpoint.  Since the HBH keying material will be different for each
 endpoint, the Media Distributor uses the association identifier
 included by the Key Distributor to ensure that the HBH keying
 material is used with the correct endpoint.
 The Media Distributor MUST forward all DTLS messages received from
 either the endpoint or the Key Distributor (via the TunneledDtls
 message) to ensure proper communication between those two entities.
 When the Media Distributor detects an endpoint has disconnected or
 when it receives conference control messages indicating the endpoint
 is to be disconnected, the Media Distributor MUST send an
 EndpointDisconnect message with the association identifier assigned
 to the endpoint to the Key Distributor.  The Media Distributor SHOULD
 take a loss of all RTP and RTCP packets as an indicator that the
 endpoint has disconnected.  The particulars of how RTP and RTCP are
 to be used to detect an endpoint disconnect, such as timeout period,
 are not specified.  The Media Distributor MAY use additional
 indicators to determine when an endpoint has disconnected.

5.4. Key Distributor Tunneling Procedures

 Each TLS tunnel established between the Media Distributor and the Key
 Distributor MUST be mutually authenticated.
 When the Media Distributor relays a DTLS message from an endpoint,
 the Media Distributor will include an association identifier that is
 unique per endpoint-originated DTLS association.  The association
 identifier remains constant for the life of the DTLS association.
 The Key Distributor identifies each distinct endpoint-originated DTLS
 association by the association identifier.
 When processing an incoming endpoint association, the Key Distributor
 MUST extract the external_session_id value transmitted in the
 ClientHello message and match that against the tls-id value the
 endpoint transmitted via SDP.  If the values in SDP and the
 ClientHello message do not match, the DTLS association MUST be
 rejected.
 The process through which the tls-id value in SDP is conveyed to the
 Key Distributor is outside the scope of this document.
 The Key Distributor MUST match the fingerprint of the certificate and
 external_session_id [RFC8844] received from the endpoint via DTLS
 with the expected fingerprint [RFC8122] and tls-id [RFC8842] values
 received via SDP.  It is through this process that the Key
 Distributor can be sure to deliver the correct conference key to the
 endpoint.
 The Key Distributor MUST report its own unique identifier in the
 external_session_id extension.  This extension is sent in the
 EncryptedExtensions message in DTLS 1.3 and the ServerHello message
 in previous DTLS versions.  This value MUST also be conveyed back to
 the client via SDP as a tls-id attribute.
 The Key Distributor MUST encapsulate any DTLS message it sends to an
 endpoint inside a TunneledDtls message (see Section 6).  The Key
 Distributor is not required to transmit all messages for a given DTLS
 association through the same tunnel if more than one tunnel has been
 established between it and the Media Distributor.
 The Key Distributor MUST use the same association identifier in
 messages sent to an endpoint as was received in messages from that
 endpoint.  This ensures the Media Distributor can forward the
 messages to the correct endpoint.
 The Key Distributor extracts tunneled DTLS messages from an endpoint
 and acts on those messages as if that endpoint had established the
 DTLS association directly with the Key Distributor.  The Key
 Distributor is acting as the DTLS server, and the endpoint is acting
 as the DTLS client.  The handling of the messages and certificates is
 exactly the same as normal DTLS-SRTP procedures between endpoints.
 The Key Distributor MUST send a MediaKeys message to the Media
 Distributor immediately after the DTLS handshake completes.  The
 MediaKeys message includes the selected cipher (i.e., protection
 profile), Master Key Identifier (MKI) value [RFC3711] (if any), HBH
 SRTP master keys, and SRTP master salt values.  The Key Distributor
 MUST use the same association identifier in the MediaKeys message as
 is used in the TunneledDtls messages for the given endpoint.
 There are presently two SRTP protection profiles defined for PERC,
 namely DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_128_GCM_AEAD_AES_128_GCM and
 DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_256_GCM_AEAD_AES_256_GCM [RFC8723].  As explained in
 Section 5.2 of [RFC8723], the Media Distributor is only given the
 SRTP master key for HBH operations.  As such, the SRTP master key
 length advertised in the MediaKeys message is half the length of the
 key normally associated with the selected "double" protection
 profile.
 The Key Distributor uses the certificate fingerprint of the endpoint
 along with the unique identifier received in the external_session_id
 extension to determine with which conference a given DTLS association
 is associated.
 The Key Distributor MUST select a cipher that is supported by itself,
 the endpoint, and the Media Distributor to ensure proper HBH
 operations.
 When the DTLS association between the endpoint and the Key
 Distributor is terminated, regardless of which entity initiated the
 termination, the Key Distributor MUST send an EndpointDisconnect
 message with the association identifier assigned to the endpoint to
 the Media Distributor.

5.5. Versioning Considerations

 Since the Media Distributor sends the first message over the tunnel,
 it effectively establishes the version of the protocol to be used.
 If that version is not supported by the Key Distributor, the Key
 Distributor MUST transmit an UnsupportedVersion message containing
 the highest version number supported and close the TLS connection.
 The Media Distributor MUST take note of the version received in an
 UnsupportedVersion message and use that version when attempting to
 re-establish a failed tunnel connection.  Note that it is not
 necessary for the Media Distributor to understand the newer version
 of the protocol to understand that the first message received is an
 UnsupportedVersion message.  The Media Distributor can determine from
 the first four octets received what the version number is and that
 the message is an UnsupportedVersion message.  The rest of the data
 received, if any, would be discarded and the connection closed (if
 not already closed).

6. Tunneling Protocol

 Tunneled messages are transported via the TLS tunnel as application
 data between the Media Distributor and the Key Distributor.  Tunnel
 messages are specified using the format described in [RFC8446],
 Section 3.  As in [RFC8446], all values are stored in network byte
 (big endian) order; the uint32 represented by the hex bytes 01 02 03
 04 is equivalent to the decimal value 16909060.
 This protocol defines several different messages, each of which
 contains the following information:
  • message type identifier
  • message body length
  • the message body
 Each of the tunnel messages is a TunnelMessage structure with the
 message type indicating the actual content of the message body.

6.1. TunnelMessage Structure

 TunnelMessage defines the structure of all messages sent via the
 tunnel protocol.  That structure includes a field called msg_type
 that identifies the specific type of message contained within
 TunnelMessage.
 enum {
     supported_profiles(1),
     unsupported_version(2),
     media_keys(3),
     tunneled_dtls(4),
     endpoint_disconnect(5),
     (255)
 } MsgType;
 opaque uuid[16];
 struct {
     MsgType msg_type;
     uint16 length;
     select (MsgType) {
         case supported_profiles:  SupportedProfiles;
         case unsupported_version: UnsupportedVersion;
         case media_keys:          MediaKeys;
         case tunneled_dtls:       TunneledDtls;
         case endpoint_disconnect: EndpointDisconnect;
   } body;
 } TunnelMessage;
 The elements of TunnelMessage include:
 msg_type:  the type of message contained within the structure body.
 length:  the length in octets of the following body of the message.
 body:  the actual message being conveyed within this TunnelMessage
    structure.

6.2. SupportedProfiles Message

 The SupportedProfiles message is defined as:
 uint8 SRTPProtectionProfile[2]; /* from RFC 5764 */
 struct {
     uint8 version;
     SRTPProtectionProfile protection_profiles<2..2^16-1>;
 } SupportedProfiles;
 The elements of SupportedProfiles include:
 version:  this document specifies version 0x00.
 protection_profiles:  the list of two-octet SRTP protection profile
    values, as per [RFC5764], supported by the Media Distributor.

6.3. UnsupportedVersion Message

 The UnsupportedVersion message is defined as:
 struct {
     uint8 highest_version;
 } UnsupportedVersion;
 UnsupportedVersion contains this single element:
 highest_version:  indicates the highest version of the protocol
    supported by the Key Distributor.

6.4. MediaKeys Message

 The MediaKeys message is defined as:
 struct {
     uuid association_id;
     SRTPProtectionProfile protection_profile;
     opaque mki<0..255>;
     opaque client_write_SRTP_master_key<1..255>;
     opaque server_write_SRTP_master_key<1..255>;
     opaque client_write_SRTP_master_salt<1..255>;
     opaque server_write_SRTP_master_salt<1..255>;
 } MediaKeys;
 The fields are described as follows:
 association_id:  a value that identifies a distinct DTLS association
    between an endpoint and the Key Distributor.
 protection_profiles:  the value of the two-octet SRTP protection
    profile value, as per [RFC5764], used for this DTLS association.
 mki:  master key identifier [RFC3711]; a zero-length field indicates
    that no MKI value is present.
 client_write_SRTP_master_key:  the value of the SRTP master key used
    by the client (endpoint).
 server_write_SRTP_master_key:  the value of the SRTP master key used
    by the server (Media Distributor).
 client_write_SRTP_master_salt:  the value of the SRTP master salt
    used by the client (endpoint).
 server_write_SRTP_master_salt:  the value of the SRTP master salt
    used by the server (Media Distributor).

6.5. TunneledDtls Message

 The TunneledDtls message is defined as:
 struct {
     uuid association_id;
     opaque dtls_message<1..2^16-1>;
 } TunneledDtls;
 The fields are described as follows:
 association_id:  a value that identifies a distinct DTLS association
    between an endpoint and the Key Distributor.
 dtls_message:  the content of the DTLS message received by the
    endpoint or to be sent to the endpoint, including one or more
    complete DTLS records.

6.6. EndpointDisconnect Message

 The EndpointDisconnect message is defined as:
 struct {
     uuid association_id;
 } EndpointDisconnect;
 The field is described as follows:
 association_id:  a value that identifies a distinct DTLS association
    between an endpoint and the Key Distributor.

7. Example Binary Encoding

 The TunnelMessage is encoded in binary, following the procedures
 specified in [RFC8446].  This section provides an example of what the
 bits on the wire would look like for the SupportedProfiles message
 that advertises support for both
 DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_128_GCM_AEAD_AES_128_GCM and
 DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_256_GCM_AEAD_AES_256_GCM [RFC8723].
 TunnelMessage:
          message_type: 0x01
                length: 0x0007
     SupportedProfiles:
                    version:  0x00
        protection_profiles:  0x0004 (length)
                              0x0009000A (value)
 Thus, the encoding on the wire, presented here in network byte order,
 would be this stream of octets:
 0x0100070000040009000A

8. IANA Considerations

 This document establishes the "Datagram Transport Layer Security
 (DTLS) Tunnel Protocol Message Types for Privacy Enhanced
 Conferencing" registry to contain message type values used in the
 DTLS tunnel protocol.  These message type values are a single octet
 in length.  This document defines the values shown in Table 1 below,
 leaving the balance of possible values reserved for future
 specifications:
           +=========+====================================+
           | MsgType | Description                        |
           +=========+====================================+
           |   0x01  | Supported SRTP Protection Profiles |
           +---------+------------------------------------+
           |   0x02  | Unsupported Version                |
           +---------+------------------------------------+
           |   0x03  | Media Keys                         |
           +---------+------------------------------------+
           |   0x04  | Tunneled DTLS                      |
           +---------+------------------------------------+
           |   0x05  | Endpoint Disconnect                |
           +---------+------------------------------------+
              Table 1: Message Type Values for the DTLS
                           Tunnel Protocol
 The value 0x00 is reserved, and all values in the range 0x06 to 0xFF
 are available for allocation.  The procedures for updating this table
 are those defined as "IETF Review" in Section 4.8 of [RFC8126].

9. Security Considerations

 Since the procedures in this document rely on TLS [RFC8446] for
 transport security, the security considerations for TLS should be
 reviewed when implementing the protocol defined in this document.
 While the tunneling protocol defined in this document does not use
 DTLS-SRTP [RFC5764] directly, it does convey and negotiate some of
 the same information (e.g., protection profile data).  As such, a
 review of the security considerations found in that document may be
 useful.
 This document describes a means of securely exchanging keying
 material and cryptographic transforms for both E2E and HBH encryption
 and authentication of media between an endpoint and a Key Distributor
 via a Media Distributor.  Additionally, the procedures result in
 delivering HBH information to the intermediary Media Distributor.
 The Key Distributor and endpoint are the only two entities with
 access to both the E2E and HBH keys, while the Media Distributor has
 access to only HBH information.  Section 8.2 of [RFC8871] enumerates
 various attacks against which one must guard when implementing a
 Media Distributor; these scenarios are important to note.
 A requirement in this document is that a TLS connection between the
 Media Distributor and the Key Distributor be mutually authenticated.
 The reason for this requirement is to ensure that only an authorized
 Media Distributor receives the HBH keying material.  If an
 unauthorized Media Distributor gains access to the HBH keying
 material, it can easily cause service degradation or denial by
 transmitting HBH-valid packets that ultimately fail E2E
 authentication or replay protection checks (see Section 3.3.2 of
 [RFC3711]).  Even if service does not appear degraded in any way,
 transmitting and processing bogus packets are a waste of both
 computational and network resources.
 The procedures defined in this document assume that the Media
 Distributor will properly convey DTLS messages between the endpoint
 and Key Distributor.  Should it fail in that responsibility by
 forwarding DTLS messages from endpoint A advertised as being from
 endpoint B, this will result in a failure at the DTLS layer of those
 DTLS sessions.  This could be an additional attack vector that Key
 Distributor implementations should consider.
 While E2E keying material passes through the Media Distributor via
 the protocol defined in this document, the Media Distributor has no
 means of gaining access to that information and therefore cannot
 affect the E2E media processing function in the endpoint except to
 present it with invalid or replayed data.  That said, any entity
 along the path that interferes with the DTLS exchange between the
 endpoint and the Key Distributor, including a malicious Media
 Distributor that is not properly authorized, could prevent an
 endpoint from properly communicating with the Key Distributor and
 therefore prevent successful conference participation.
 It is worth noting that a compromised Media Distributor can convey
 information to an adversary, such as participant IP addresses,
 negotiated protection profiles, or other metadata.  While [RFC8871]
 explains that a malicious or compromised Media Distributor can
 disrupt communications, an additional attack vector introduced by
 this protocol is the potential disruption of DTLS negotiation or
 premature removal of a participant from a conference by sending an
 EndpointDisconnect message to the Key Distributor.
 The Key Distributor should be aware of the possibility that a
 malicious Media Distributor might transmit an EndpointDisconnect
 message to the Key Distributor when the endpoint is in fact still
 connected.
 While the Security Considerations section of [RFC8871] describes
 various attacks one needs to consider with respect to the Key
 Distributor and denial of service, use of this protocol introduces
 another possible attack vector.  Consider the case where a malicious
 endpoint sends unsolicited DTLS-SRTP messages to a Media Distributor.
 The Media Distributor will normally forward those messages to the Key
 Distributor and, if found invalid, such messages only serve to
 consume resources on both the Media Distributor and Key Distributor.

10. References

10.1. 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>.
 [RFC3711]  Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
            Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
            RFC 3711, DOI 10.17487/RFC3711, March 2004,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3711>.
 [RFC4122]  Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
            Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, July 2005,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122>.
 [RFC5764]  McGrew, D. and E. Rescorla, "Datagram Transport Layer
            Security (DTLS) Extension to Establish Keys for the Secure
            Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 5764,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC5764, May 2010,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5764>.
 [RFC8122]  Lennox, J. and C. Holmberg, "Connection-Oriented Media
            Transport over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
            in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 8122,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8122, March 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8122>.
 [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>.
 [RFC8723]  Jennings, C., Jones, P., Barnes, R., and A.B. Roach,
            "Double Encryption Procedures for the Secure Real-Time
            Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 8723,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8723, April 2020,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8723>.
 [RFC8842]  Holmberg, C. and R. Shpount, "Session Description Protocol
            (SDP) Offer/Answer Considerations for Datagram Transport
            Layer Security (DTLS) and Transport Layer Security (TLS)",
            RFC 8842, DOI 10.17487/RFC8842, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8842>.
 [RFC8844]  Thomson, M. and E. Rescorla, "Unknown Key-Share Attacks on
            Uses of TLS with the Session Description Protocol (SDP)",
            RFC 8844, DOI 10.17487/RFC8844, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8844>.
 [RFC8871]  Jones, P., Benham, D., and C. Groves, "A Solution
            Framework for Private Media in Privacy-Enhanced RTP
            Conferencing (PERC)", RFC 8871, DOI 10.17487/RFC8871,
            January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8871>.
 [RFC9147]  Rescorla, E., Tschofenig, H., and N. Modadugu, "The
            Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version
            1.3", RFC 9147, DOI 10.17487/RFC9147, April 2022,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9147>.

10.2. Informative References

 [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
            with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3264>.
 [RFC3550]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
            Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
            Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550,
            July 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.
 [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
            Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
            RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
 [RFC8866]  Begen, A., Kyzivat, P., Perkins, C., and M. Handley, "SDP:
            Session Description Protocol", RFC 8866,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8866, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8866>.

Acknowledgements

 The authors would like to thank David Benham and Cullen Jennings for
 reviewing this document and providing constructive comments.

Authors' Addresses

 Paul E. Jones
 Cisco Systems, Inc.
 7025 Kit Creek Rd.
 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
 United States of America
 Phone: +1 919 476 2048
 Email: paulej@packetizer.com
 Paul M. Ellenbogen
 Princeton University
 Phone: +1 206 851 2069
 Email: pe5@cs.princeton.edu
 Nils H. Ohlmeier
 8x8, Inc.
 Phone: +1 408 659 6457
 Email: nils@ohlmeier.org
/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc9185.txt · Last modified: 2022/04/26 01:32 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki