GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc3110

Network Working Group D. Eastlake 3rd Request for Comments: 3110 Motorola Obsoletes: 2537 May 2001 Category: Standards Track

    RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the Domain Name System (DNS)

Status of this Memo

 This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
 Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
 improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
 Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
 and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

 This document describes how to produce RSA/SHA1 SIG resource records
 (RRs) in Section 3 and, so as to completely replace RFC 2537,
 describes how to produce RSA KEY RRs in Section 2.
 Since the adoption of a Proposed Standard for RSA signatures in the
 DNS (Domain Name Space), advances in hashing have been made.  A new
 DNS signature algorithm is defined to make these advances available
 in SIG RRs.  The use of the previously specified weaker mechanism is
 deprecated.  The algorithm number of the RSA KEY RR is changed to
 correspond to this new SIG algorithm.  No other changes are made to
 DNS security.

Acknowledgements

 Material and comments from the following have been incorporated and
 are gratefully acknowledged:
    Olafur Gudmundsson
    The IESG
    Charlie Kaufman
    Steve Wang

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 3110 RSA SIGs and KEYs in the DNS May 2001

Table of Contents

 1. Introduction................................................... 2
 2. RSA Public KEY Resource Records................................ 3
 3. RSA/SHA1 SIG Resource Records.................................. 3
 4. Performance Considerations..................................... 4
 5. IANA Considerations............................................ 5
 6. Security Considerations........................................ 5
 References........................................................ 5
 Author's Address.................................................. 6
 Full Copyright Statement.......................................... 7

1. Introduction

 The Domain Name System (DNS) is the global hierarchical replicated
 distributed database system for Internet addressing, mail proxy, and
 other information [RFC1034, 1035, etc.].  The DNS has been extended
 to include digital signatures and cryptographic keys as described in
 [RFC2535].  Thus the DNS can now be secured and used for secure key
 distribution.
 Familiarity with the RSA and SHA-1 algorithms is assumed [Schneier,
 FIP180] in this document.
 RFC 2537 described how to store RSA keys and RSA/MD5 based signatures
 in the DNS.  However, since the adoption of RFC 2537, continued
 cryptographic research has revealed hints of weakness in the MD5
 [RFC1321] algorithm used in RFC 2537.  The SHA1 Secure Hash Algorithm
 [FIP180], which produces a larger hash, has been developed.  By now
 there has been sufficient experience with SHA1 that it is generally
 acknowledged to be stronger than MD5.  While this stronger hash is
 probably not needed today in most secure DNS zones, critical zones
 such a root, most top level domains, and some second and third level
 domains, are sufficiently valuable targets that it would be negligent
 not to provide what are generally agreed to be stronger mechanisms.
 Furthermore, future advances in cryptanalysis and/or computer speeds
 may require a stronger hash everywhere.  In addition, the additional
 computation required by SHA1 above that required by MD5 is
 insignificant compared with the computational effort required by the
 RSA modular exponentiation.
 This document describes how to produce RSA/SHA1 SIG RRs in Section 3
 and, so as to completely replace RFC 2537, describes how to produce
 RSA KEY RRs in Section 2.
 Implementation of the RSA algorithm in DNS with SHA1 is MANDATORY for
 DNSSEC.  The generation of RSA/MD5 SIG RRs as described in RFC 2537
 is NOT RECOMMENDED.

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 3110 RSA SIGs and KEYs in the DNS May 2001

 The key words "MUST", "REQUIRED", "SHOULD", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT
 RECOMMENDED", and "MAY" in this document are to be interpreted as
 described in RFC 2119.

2. RSA Public KEY Resource Records

 RSA public keys are stored in the DNS as KEY RRs using algorithm
 number 5 [RFC2535].  The structure of the algorithm specific portion
 of the RDATA part of such RRs is as shown below.
       Field             Size
       -----             ----
       exponent length   1 or 3 octets (see text)
       exponent          as specified by length field
       modulus           remaining space
 For interoperability, the exponent and modulus are each limited to
 4096 bits in length.  The public key exponent is a variable length
 unsigned integer.  Its length in octets is represented as one octet
 if it is in the range of 1 to 255 and by a zero octet followed by a
 two octet unsigned length if it is longer than 255 bytes.  The public
 key modulus field is a multiprecision unsigned integer.  The length
 of the modulus can be determined from the RDLENGTH and the preceding
 RDATA fields including the exponent.  Leading zero octets are
 prohibited in the exponent and modulus.
 Note: KEY RRs for use with RSA/SHA1 DNS signatures MUST use this
 algorithm number (rather than the algorithm number specified in the
 obsoleted RFC 2537).
 Note: This changes the algorithm number for RSA KEY RRs to be the
 same as the new algorithm number for RSA/SHA1 SIGs.

3. RSA/SHA1 SIG Resource Records

 RSA/SHA1 signatures are stored in the DNS using SIG resource records
 (RRs) with algorithm number 5.
 The signature portion of the SIG RR RDATA area, when using the
 RSA/SHA1 algorithm, is calculated as shown below.  The data signed is
 determined as specified in RFC 2535.  See RFC 2535 for fields in the
 SIG RR RDATA which precede the signature itself.
       hash = SHA1 ( data )
       signature = ( 01 | FF* | 00 | prefix | hash ) ** e (mod n)

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 3110 RSA SIGs and KEYs in the DNS May 2001

 where SHA1 is the message digest algorithm documented in [FIP180],
 "|" is concatenation, "e" is the private key exponent of the signer,
 and "n" is the modulus of the signer's public key.  01, FF, and 00
 are fixed octets of the corresponding hexadecimal value.  "prefix" is
 the ASN.1 BER SHA1 algorithm designator prefix required in PKCS1
 [RFC2437], that is,
       hex 30 21 30 09 06 05 2B 0E 03 02 1A 05 00 04 14
 This prefix is included to make it easier to use standard
 cryptographic libraries.  The FF octet MUST be repeated the maximum
 number of times such that the value of the quantity being
 exponentiated is one octet shorter than the value of n.
 (The above specifications are identical to the corresponding parts of
 Public Key Cryptographic Standard #1 [RFC2437].)
 The size of "n", including most and least significant bits (which
 will be 1) MUST be not less than 512 bits and not more than 4096
 bits.  "n" and "e" SHOULD be chosen such that the public exponent is
 small.  These are protocol limits.  For a discussion of key size see
 RFC 2541.
 Leading zero bytes are permitted in the RSA/SHA1 algorithm signature.

4. Performance Considerations

 General signature generation speeds are roughly the same for RSA and
 DSA [RFC2536].  With sufficient pre-computation, signature generation
 with DSA is faster than RSA.  Key generation is also faster for DSA.
 However, signature verification is an order of magnitude slower with
 DSA when the RSA public exponent is chosen to be small as is
 recommended for KEY RRs used in domain name system (DNS) data
 authentication.
 A public exponent of 3 minimizes the effort needed to verify a
 signature.  Use of 3 as the public exponent is weak for
 confidentiality uses since, if the same data can be collected
 encrypted under three different keys with an exponent of 3 then,
 using the Chinese Remainder Theorem [NETSEC], the original plain text
 can be easily recovered.  If a key is known to be used only for
 authentication, as is the case with DNSSEC, then an exponent of 3 is
 acceptable.  However other applications in the future may wish to
 leverage DNS distributed keys for applications that do require
 confidentiality.  For keys which might have such other uses, a more
 conservative choice would be 65537 (F4, the fourth fermat number).

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 3110 RSA SIGs and KEYs in the DNS May 2001

 Current DNS implementations are optimized for small transfers,
 typically less than 512 bytes including DNS overhead.  Larger
 transfers will perform correctly and extensions have been
 standardized [RFC2671] to make larger transfers more efficient, it is
 still advisable at this time to make reasonable efforts to minimize
 the size of KEY RR sets stored within the DNS consistent with
 adequate security.  Keep in mind that in a secure zone, at least one
 authenticating SIG RR will also be returned.

5. IANA Considerations

 The DNSSEC algorithm number 5 is allocated for RSA/SHA1 SIG RRs and
 RSA KEY RRs.

6. Security Considerations

 Many of the general security considerations in RFC 2535 apply.  Keys
 retrieved from the DNS should not be trusted unless (1) they have
 been securely obtained from a secure resolver or independently
 verified by the user and (2) this secure resolver and secure
 obtainment or independent verification conform to security policies
 acceptable to the user.  As with all cryptographic algorithms,
 evaluating the necessary strength of the key is essential and
 dependent on local policy.  For particularly critical applications,
 implementers are encouraged to consider the range of available
 algorithms and key sizes.  See also RFC 2541, "DNS Security
 Operational Considerations".

References

 [FIP180]   U.S. Department of Commerce, "Secure Hash Standard", FIPS
            PUB 180-1, 17 Apr 1995.
 [NETSEC]   Network Security: PRIVATE Communications in a PUBLIC
            World, Charlie Kaufman, Radia Perlman, & Mike Speciner,
            Prentice Hall Series in Computer Networking and
            Distributed Communications, 1995.
 [RFC1034]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities",
            STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
 [RFC1035]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and
            Specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
 [RFC1321]  Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321,
            April 1992.

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 3110 RSA SIGs and KEYs in the DNS May 2001

 [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
            Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [RFC2437]  Kaliski, B. and J. Staddon, "PKCS #1: RSA Cryptography
            Specifications Version 2.0", RFC 2437, October 1998.
 [RFC2535]  Eastlake, D., "Domain Name System Security Extensions",
            RFC 2535, March 1999.
 [RFC2536]  Eastlake, D., "DSA KEYs and SIGs in the Domain Name System
            (DNS)", RFC 2536, March 1999.
 [RFC2537]  Eastlake, D., "RSA/MD5 KEYs and SIGs in the Domain Name
            System (DNS)", RFC 2537, March 1999.
 [RFC2541]  Eastlake, D., "DNS Security Operational Considerations",
            RFC 2541, March 1999.
 [RFC2671]  Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)", RFC
            2671, August 1999.
 [Schneier] Bruce Schneier, "Applied Cryptography Second Edition:
            protocols, algorithms, and source code in C", 1996, John
            Wiley and Sons, ISBN 0-471-11709-9.

Author's Address

 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
 Motorola
 155 Beaver Street
 Milford, MA 01757 USA
 Phone:   +1-508-261-5434 (w)
          +1-508-634-2066 (h)
 Fax      +1-508-261-4777 (w)
 EMail:   Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 3110 RSA SIGs and KEYs in the DNS May 2001

Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.
 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
 included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
 English.
 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
 Internet Society.

D. Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 7]

/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc3110.txt · Last modified: 2001/05/21 20:04 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki