GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc3829

Network Working Group R. Weltman Request for Comments: 3829 America Online Category: Informational M. Smith

                                                   Pearl Crescent, LLC
                                                               M. Wahl
                                                             July 2004
           Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)
       Authorization Identity Request and Response Controls

Status of this Memo

 This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
 not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
 memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).

Abstract

 This document extends the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
 (LDAP) bind operation with a mechanism for requesting and returning
 the authorization identity it establishes.  Specifically, this
 document defines the Authorization Identity Request and Response
 controls for use with the Bind operation.

1. Introduction

 This document defines support for the Authorization Identity Request
 Control and the Authorization Identity Response Control for
 requesting and returning the authorization established in a bind
 operation.  The Authorization Identity Request Control may be
 submitted by a client in a bind request if authenticating with
 version 3 of the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)
 protocol [LDAPv3].  In the LDAP server's bind response, it may then
 include an Authorization Identity Response Control.  The response
 control contains the identity assumed by the client.  This is useful
 when there is a mapping step or other indirection during the bind, so
 that the client can be told what LDAP identity was granted.  Client
 authentication with certificates is the primary situation where this
 applies.  Also, some Simple Authentication and Security Layer [SASL]
 authentication mechanisms may not involve the client explicitly
 providing a DN, or may result in an authorization identity which is
 different from the authentication identity provided by the client
 [AUTH].

Weltman, et al. Informational [Page 1] RFC 3829 Authorization Identity Bind Control July 2004

 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY"
 used in this document are to be interpreted as described in
 [RFCKeyWords].

2. Publishing support for the Authorization Identity Request Control

  and the Authorization Identity Response Control
 Support for the Authorization Identity Request Control and the
 Authorization Identity Response Control is indicated by the presence
 of the Object Identifiers (OIDs) 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.16 and
 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.15, respectively, in the supportedControl
 attribute [LDAPATTRS] of a server's root DSA-specific Entry (DSE).

3. Authorization Identity Request Control

 This control MAY be included in any bind request which specifies
 protocol version 3, as part of the controls field of the LDAPMessage
 as defined in [LDAPPROT].  In a multi-step bind operation, the client
 MUST provide the control with each bind request.
 The controlType is "2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.16" and the controlValue is
 absent.

4. Authorization Identity Response Control

 This control MAY be included in any final bind response where the
 first bind request of the bind operation included an Authorization
 Identity Request Control as part of the controls field of the
 LDAPMessage as defined in [LDAPPROT].
 The controlType is "2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.15".  If the bind request
 succeeded and resulted in an identity (not anonymous), the
 controlValue contains the authorization identity (authzId), as
 defined in [AUTH] section 9, granted to the requestor.  If the bind
 request resulted in an anonymous association, the controlValue field
 is a string of zero length.  If the bind request resulted in more
 than one authzId, the primary authzId is returned in the controlValue
 field.
 The control is only included in a bind response if the resultCode for
 the bind operation is success.
 If the server requires confidentiality protections to be in place
 prior to use of this control (see Security Considerations), the
 server reports failure to have adequate confidentiality protections
 in place by returning the confidentialityRequired result code.

Weltman, et al. Informational [Page 2] RFC 3829 Authorization Identity Bind Control July 2004

 If the client has insufficient access rights to the requested
 authorization information, the server reports this by returning the
 insufficientAccessRights result code.
 Identities presented by a client as part of the authentication
 process may be mapped by the server to one or more authorization
 identities.  The bind response control can be used to retrieve the
 primary authzId.
 For example, during client authentication with certificates [AUTH], a
 client may possess more than one certificate and may not be able to
 determine which one was ultimately selected for authentication to the
 server.  The subject DN field in the selected certificate may not
 correspond exactly to a DN in the directory, but rather have gone
 through a mapping process controlled by the server.  Upon completing
 the certificate-based authentication, the client may issue a SASL
 [SASL] bind request, specifying the EXTERNAL mechanism and including
 an Authorization Identity Request Control.  The bind response MAY
 include an Authorization Identity Response Control indicating the DN
 in the server's Directory Information Tree (DIT) which the
 certificate was mapped to.

5. Alternative Approach with Extended Operation

 The LDAP "Who am I?" [AUTHZID] extended operation provides a
 mechanism to query the authorization identity associated with a bound
 connection.  Using an extended operation, as opposed to a bind
 response control, allows a client to learn the authorization identity
 after the bind has established integrity and data confidentiality
 protections.  The disadvantages of the extended operation approach
 are coordination issues between "Who am I?" requests, bind requests,
 and other requests, and that an extra operation is required to learn
 the authorization identity.  For multithreaded or high bandwidth
 server application environments, the bind response approach may be
 preferable.

6. Security Considerations

 The Authorization Identity Request and Response Controls are subject
 to standard LDAP security considerations.  The controls may be passed
 over a secure as well as over an insecure channel.  They are not
 protected by security layers negotiated by the bind operation.
 The response control allows for an additional authorization identity
 to be passed.  In some deployments, these identities may contain
 confidential information which require privacy protection.  In such
 deployments, a security layer should be established prior to issuing
 a bind request with an Authorization Identity Request Control.

Weltman, et al. Informational [Page 3] RFC 3829 Authorization Identity Bind Control July 2004

7. IANA Considerations

 The OIDs 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.16 and 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.15 are
 reserved for the Authorization Identity Request and Response
 Controls, respectively.  The Authorization Identity Request Control
 has been registered as an LDAP Protocol Mechanism [IANALDAP].

8. References

8.1. Normative References

 [LDAPv3]      Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access
               Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377,
               September 2002.
 [LDAPPROT]    Wahl, M., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight
               Directory Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December
               1997.
 [RFCKeyWords] Bradner, S., "Key Words for use in RFCs to Indicate
               Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [AUTH]        Wahl, M., Alvestrand, H., Hodges, J. and R. Morgan,
               "Authentication Methods for LDAP", RFC 2829, May 2000.
 [SASL]        Myers, J., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer
               (SASL)", RFC 2222, October 1997.
 [LDAPATTRS]   Wahl, M., Coulbeck, A., Howes, T. and S. Kille,
               "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute
               Syntax Definitions", RFC 2252, December 1997.
 [IANALDAP]    Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access
               Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377,
               September 2002.

8.2. Informative References

 [AUTHZID]     Zeilenga, K., "LDAP 'Who am I?' Operation", Work in
               Progress, April 2002.

Weltman, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 3829 Authorization Identity Bind Control July 2004

9. Author's Addresses

 Rob Weltman
 America Online
 360 W. Caribbean Drive
 Sunnyvale, CA 94089
 USA
 Phone: +1 650 937-3194
 EMail: robw@worldspot.com
 Mark Smith
 Pearl Crescent, LLC
 447 Marlpool Drive
 Saline, MI 48176
 USA
 Phone: +1 734 944-2856
 EMail: mcs@pearlcrescent.com
 Mark Wahl
 PO Box 90626
 Austin, TX 78709-0626
 USA

Weltman, et al. Informational [Page 5] RFC 3829 Authorization Identity Bind Control July 2004

10. Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
 to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
 except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.

Intellectual Property

 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
 made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
 http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
 this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
 ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

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

Weltman, et al. Informational [Page 6]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc3829.txt · Last modified: 2004/07/01 16:52 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki