GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc4051

Network Working Group D. Eastlake 3rd Request for Comments: 4051 Motorola Laboratories Category: Standards Track April 2005

    Additional XML Security Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)

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 (2005).

Abstract

 A number of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) intended for use with
 XML Digital Signatures, Encryption, and Canonicalization are defined.
 These URIs identify algorithms and types of keying information.

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction..................................................  2
 2.  Algorithms....................................................  3
     2.1.  DigestMethod Algorithms.................................  3
           2.1.1.  MD5.............................................  3
           2.1.2.  SHA-224.........................................  3
           2.1.3.  SHA-384.........................................  4
     2.2.  SignatureMethod Message Authentication Code Algorithms..  4
           2.2.1.  HMAC-MD5........................................  4
           2.2.2.  HMAC SHA Variations.............................  5
           2.2.3.  HMAC-RIPEMD160..................................  6
     2.3.  SignatureMethod Public Key Signature Algorithms.........  6
           2.3.1.  RSA-MD5.........................................  6
           2.3.2.  RSA-SHA256......................................  7
           2.3.3.  RSA-SHA384......................................  7
           2.3.4.  RSA-SHA512......................................  7
           2.3.5.  RSA-RIPEMD160...................................  8
           2.3.6.  ECDSA-SHA*......................................  8
           2.3.7.  ESIGN-SHA1......................................  8
     2.4.  Minimal Canonicalization................................  9
     2.5.  Transform Algorithms....................................  9
           2.5.1.  XPointer........................................  9

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

     2.6.  EncryptionMethod Algorithms............................. 10
           2.6.1.  ARCFOUR Encryption Algorithm.................... 10
           2.6.2.  Camellia Block Encryption....................... 10
           2.6.3.  Camellia Key Wrap............................... 11
           2.6.4.  PSEC-KEM........................................ 11
 3.  KeyInfo....................................................... 12
     3.1.  PKCS #7 Bag of Certificates and CRLs.................... 12
     3.2.  Additional RetrievalMethod Type Values.................. 12
 4.  IANA Considerations........................................... 13
 5.  Security Considerations....................................... 13
 Acknowledgements.................................................. 13
 Normative References.............................................. 13
 Informative References............................................ 15
 Author's Address.................................................. 16
 Full Copyright Statement.......................................... 17

1. Introduction

 XML Digital Signatures, Canonicalization, and Encryption have been
 standardized by the W3C and the joint IETF/W3C XMLDSIG working group.
 All of these are now W3C Recommendations and IETF Informational or
 Standards Track documents.  They are available as follows:
 IETF level           W3C REC     Topic
 -----------          -------     -----
 [RFC3275]  Draft Std [XMLDSIG]   XML Digital Signatures
 [RFC3076]  Info      [CANON]     Canonical XML
  - - - - - -         [XMLENC]    XML Encryption
 [RFC3741]  Info      [EXCANON]   Exclusive XML Canonicalization
 All of these standards and recommendations use URIs [RFC2396] to
 identify algorithms and keying information types.  This document
 provides a convenient reference list of URIs and descriptions for
 algorithms in which there is substantial interest, but which cannot
 or have not been included in the main documents.  Note that raising
 XML digital signature to a Draft Standard in the IETF required
 removal of any algorithms for which interoperability from the main
 standards document has not been demonstrated.  This required removal
 of the Minimal Canonicalization algorithm, in which there appears to
 be a continued interest, to be dropped from the standards track
 specification.  It is included here.
 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

2. Algorithms

 The URI [RFC2396] being dropped from the standard because of the
 transition from Proposed Standard to Draft Standard is included in
 Section 2.4 with its original prefix so as to avoid changing the
 XMLDSIG standard's namespace.
    http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#
 Additional algorithms are given URIs that start with:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#
 An "xmldsig-more" URI does not imply any official W3C status for
 these algorithms or identifiers or that they are only useful in
 digital signatures.  Currently, dereferencing such URIs may or may
 not produce a temporary placeholder document.  Permission to use this
 URI prefix has been given by the W3C.

2.1. DigestMethod Algorithms

 These algorithms are usable wherever a DigestMethod element occurs.

2.1.1. MD5

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#md5
 The MD5 algorithm [RFC1321] takes no explicit parameters.  An example
 of an MD5 DigestAlgorithm element is:
 <DigestAlgorithm
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#md5"/>
 An MD5 digest is a 128-bit string.  The content of the DigestValue
 element shall be the base64 [RFC2405] encoding of this bit string
 viewed as a 16-octet octet stream.

2.1.2. SHA-224

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha224
 The SHA-224 algorithm [FIPS-180-2change, RFC3874] takes no explicit
 parameters.  An example of a SHA-224 DigestAlgorithm element is:

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 <DigestAlgorithm
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha224" />
 A SHA-224 digest is a 224 bit string.  The content of the DigestValue
 element shall be the base64 [RFC2405] encoding of this string viewed
 as a 28-octet stream.  Because it takes roughly the same amount of
 effort to compute a SHA-224 message digest as a SHA-256 digest, and
 terseness is usually not a criteria in an XML application,
 consideration should be given to the use of SHA-256 as an
 alternative.

2.1.3. SHA-384

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384
 The SHA-384 algorithm [FIPS-180-2] takes no explicit parameters.  An
 example of a SHA-384 DigestAlgorithm element is:
 <DigestAlgorithm
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384" />
 A SHA-384 digest is a 384 bit string.  The content of the DigestValue
 element shall be the base64 [RFC2405] encoding of this string viewed
 as a 48-octet stream.  Because it takes roughly the same amount of
 effort to compute a SHA-384 message digest as a SHA-512 digest and
 terseness is usually not a criteria in XML application, consideration
 should be given to the use of SHA-512 as an alternative.

2.2. SignatureMethod Message Authentication Code Algorithms

 Note: Some text in this section is duplicated from [RFC3275] for the
 convenience of the reader.  RFC 3275 is normative in case of
 conflict.

2.2.1. HMAC-MD5

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5
 The HMAC algorithm [RFC2104] takes the truncation length in bits as a
 parameter; if the parameter is not specified then all the bits of the
 hash are output.  An example of an HMAC-MD5 SignatureMethod element
 is as follows:

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 <SignatureMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5">
    <HMACOutputLength>112</HMACOutputLength>
 </SignatureMethod>
 The output of the HMAC algorithm is ultimately the output (possibly
 truncated) of the chosen digest algorithm.  This value shall be
 base64 [RFC2405] encoded in the same straightforward fashion as the
 output of the digest algorithms.  For example, the SignatureValue
 element for the HMAC-MD5 digest
    9294727A 3638BB1C 13F48EF8 158BFC9D
 from the test vectors in [RFC2104] would be
    kpRyejY4uxwT9I74FYv8nQ==
 Schema Definition:
    <simpleType name="HMACOutputLength">
       <restriction base="integer" />
    </simpleType>
 DTD:
    <!ELEMENT HMACOutputLength (#PCDATA) >
 The Schema Definition and DTD immediately shown above are taken from
 [RFC3275].
 Although some cryptographic suspicions have recently been cast on MD5
 for use in signatures such as RSA-MD5 below, this does not effect use
 of MD5 in HMAC.

2.2.2. HMAC SHA Variations

 Identifiers:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha224
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha256
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha384
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha512
 SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512 [FIPS-180-2, FIPS-180-2change,
 RFC3874] can also be used in HMAC as described in section 2.2.1 for
 HMAC-MD5.

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

2.2.3. HMAC-RIPEMD160

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-ripemd160
 RIPEMD-160 [RIPEMD-160] can also be used in HMAC as described in
 section 2.2.1 for HMAC-MD5.

2.3. SignatureMethod Public Key Signature Algorithms

 These algorithms are distinguished from those in Section 2.2 in that
 they use public key methods.  The verification key is different from
 and not feasibly derivable from the signing key.

2.3.1. RSA-MD5

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5
 RSA-MD5 implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm described in
 [RFC3447].  An example of use is
 <SignatureMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5" />
 The SignatureValue content for an RSA-MD5 signature is the base64
 [RFC2405] encoding of the octet string computed as per [RFC3447],
 section 8.1.1, signature generation for the RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5
 signature scheme.  As specified in the EMSA-PKCS1-V1_5-ENCODE
 function in [RFC3447, section 9.2.1], the value input to the
 signature function MUST contain a pre-pended algorithm object
 identifier for the hash function, but the availability of an ASN.1
 parser and recognition of OIDs are not required of a signature
 verifier.  The PKCS#1 v1.5 representation appears as:
    CRYPT (PAD (ASN.1 (OID, DIGEST (data))))
 Note that the padded ASN.1 will be of the following form:
    01 | FF* | 00 | prefix | hash
 Vertical bar ("|") represents concatenation.  "01", "FF", and "00"
 are fixed octets of the corresponding hexadecimal value and the
 asterisk ("*") after "FF" indicates repetition.  "hash" is the MD5
 digest of the data.  "prefix" is the ASN.1 BER MD5 algorithm
 designator prefix required in PKCS #1 [RFC3447], that is:
    hex 30 20 30 0c 06 08 2a 86 48 86 f7 0d 02 05 05 00 04 10

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 This prefix is included to facilitate the use of standard
 cryptographic libraries.  The FF octet MUST be repeated enough times
 that the value of the quantity being CRYPTed is exactly one octet
 shorter than the RSA modulus.
 Due to increases in computer processor power and advances in
 cryptography, use of RSA-MD5 is NOT RECOMMENDED.

2.3.2. RSA-SHA256

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256
 This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447] as described
 in section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-256 algorithm designator
 prefix.  An example of use is:
 <SignatureMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256" />

2.3.3 RSA-SHA384

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384
 This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447] as described
 in section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-384 algorithm designator
 prefix.  An example of use is:
 <SignatureMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384" />
 Because it takes about the same effort to calculate a SHA-384 message
 digest as a SHA-512 message digest, it is suggested that RSA-SHA512
 be used in preference to RSA-SHA384 where possible.

2.3.4. RSA-SHA512

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512
 This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447] as described
 in section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-512 algorithm designator
 prefix.  An example of use is:
 <SignatureMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512" />

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 7] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

2.3.5. RSA-RIPEMD160

 Identifier:
   http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/rsa-ripemd160
 This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447], as
 described in section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER RIPEMD160
 algorithm designator prefix.  An example of use is:
 <SignatureMethod
   Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/rsa-ripemd160" />

2.3.6. ECDSA-SHA*

 Identifiers
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha1
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha224
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha256
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha384
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha512
 The Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) [FIPS-186-2]
 is the elliptic curve analogue of the DSA (DSS) signature method.
 For detailed specifications on how to use it with SHA hash functions
 and XML Digital Signature, please see [X9.62] and [ECDSA].

2.3.7. ESIGN-SHA1

 Identifier
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha224
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha256
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha384
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha512
 The ESIGN algorithm specified in [IEEE-P1363a] is a signature scheme
 based on the integer factorization problem.  It is much faster than
 previous digital signature schemes so ESIGN can be implemented on
 smart cards without special co-processors.
 An example of use is:
 <SignatureMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1" />

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 8] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

2.4. Minimal Canonicalization

 Thus far two independent interoperable implementations of Minimal
 Canonicalization have not been announced.  Therefore, when XML
 Digital Signature was advanced from Proposed Standard [RFC3075] to
 Draft Standard [RFC3275], Minimal Canonicalization was dropped from
 the standards track documents.  However, there is still interest in
 Minimal Canonicalization, indicating its possible future use.  For
 its definition, see [RFC3075], Section 6.5.1.
 For reference, its identifier remains:
    http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#minimal

2.5. Transform Algorithms

 Note that all CanonicalizationMethod algorithms can also be used as
 transform algorithms.

2.5.1. XPointer

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr
 This transform algorithm takes an [XPointer] as an explicit
 parameter.  An example of use is [RFC3092]:
 <Transform
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr">
    <XPointer
       xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr">
          xpointer(id("foo")) xmlns(bar=http://foobar.example)
          xpointer(//bar:Zab[@Id="foo"])
    </XPointer>
 </Transform>
 Schema Definition:
    <element name="XPointer" type="string">
 DTD:
    <!ELEMENT XPointer (#PCDATA) >
 Input to this transform is an octet stream (which is then parsed into
 XML).

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 9] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 Output from this transform is a node set; the results of the XPointer
 are processed as defined in the XMLDSIG specification [RFC3275] for a
 same document XPointer.

2.6. EncryptionMethod Algorithms

 This subsection gives identifiers and information for several
 EncryptionMethod Algorithms.

2.6.1. ARCFOUR Encryption Algorithm

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour
 ARCFOUR is a fast, simple stream encryption algorithm that is
 compatible with RSA Security's RC4 algorithm.  An example of the
 EncryptionMethod element using ARCFOUR is
 <EncryptionMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour">
    <KeySize>40</KeySize>
 </EncryptionMethod>
 Note that Arcfour makes use of the generic KeySize parameter
 specified and defined in [XMLENC].

2.6.2. Camellia Block Encryption

 Identifiers:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbc
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia192-cbc
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia256-cbc
 Camellia is an efficient and secure block cipher with the same
 interface as the AES [Camellia, RFC3713], that is 128-bit block size
 and 128, 192, and 256 bit key sizes.  In XML Encryption, Camellia is
 used in the same way as the AES: It is used in the Cipher Block
 Chaining (CBC) mode with a 128-bit initialization vector (IV).  The
 resulting cipher text is prefixed by the IV.  If included in XML
 output, it is then base64 encoded.  An example Camellia
 EncryptionMethod is as follows:
 <EncryptionMethod
    Algorithm=
    "http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbc" />

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 10] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

2.6.3. Camellia Key Wrap

 Identifiers:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia192
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia256
 The Camellia [Camellia, RFC3713] key wrap is identical to the AES key
 wrap algorithm [RFC3394] specified in the XML Encryption standard
 with "AES" replaced by "Camellia".  As with AES key wrap, the check
 value is 0xA6A6A6A6A6A6A6A6.
 The algorithm is the same regardless of the size of the Camellia key
 used in wrapping (called the key encrypting key or KEK).  The
 implementation of Camellia is OPTIONAL.  However, if it is supported,
 the same implementation guidelines of which combinations of KEK size
 and wrapped key size should be required to be supported and which are
 optional to be supported should be followed as for AES.  That is to
 say, if Camellia key wrap is supported, then wrapping 128-bit keys
 with a 128-bit KEK and wrapping 256-bit keys with a 256-bit KEK are
 REQUIRED and all other combinations are OPTIONAL.
 An example of use is:
 <EncryptionMethod
    Algorithm=
    "http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128" />

2.6.4. PSEC-KEM

 Identifier:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#psec-kem
 The PSEC-KEM algorithm, specified in [ISO/IEC-18033-2], is a key
 encapsulation mechanism using elliptic curve encryption.
 An example of use is:
 <EncryptionMethod
    Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#psec-kem">
    <ECParameters>
       <Version>version</Version>
       <FieldID>id</FieldID>
       <Curve>curve</Curve>
       <Base>base</Base>
       <Order>order</Order>
       <Cofactor>cofactor</Cofactor>
    </ECParameters>

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 11] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 </EncryptionMethod>
 See [ISO/IEC-18033-2] for information on the parameters above.

3. KeyInfo

 In section 3.1 a new KeyInfo element child is specified, while in
 section 3.2 additional KeyInfo Type values for use in RetrievalMethod
 are specified.

3.1. PKCS #7 Bag of Certificates and CRLs

 A PKCS #7 [RFC2315] "signedData" can also be used as a bag of
 certificates and/or certificate revocation lists (CRLs).  The
 PKCS7signedData element is defined to accommodate such structures
 within KeyInfo.  The binary PKCS #7 structure is base64 [RFC2405]
 encoded.  Any signer information present is ignored.  The following
 is an example, eliding the base64 data [RFC3092]:
 <foo:PKCS7signedData
    xmlns:foo="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more">
    ...
 </foo:PKCS7signedData>

3.2. Additional RetrievalMethod Type Values

 The Type attribute of RetrievalMethod is an optional identifier for
 the type of data to be retrieved.  The result of dereferencing a
 RetrievalMethod reference for all KeyInfo types with an XML structure
 is an XML element or document with that element as the root.  The
 various "raw" key information types return a binary value.  Thus,
 they require a Type attribute because they are not unambiguously
 parseable.
 Identifiers:
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyValue
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#RetrievalMethod
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyName
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawX509CRL
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPGPKeyPacket
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawSPKISexp
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedData
    http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPKCS7signedData

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 12] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

4. IANA Considerations

 As it is easy for people to construct their own unique URIs [RFC2396]
 and possibly obtain a URI from the W3C if appropriate, it is not
 intended that any additional "http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-
 more#" URIs be created beyond those enumerated in this document.
 (W3C Namespace stability rules prohibit the creation of new URIs
 under "http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#".)

5. Security Considerations

 Due to computer speed and cryptographic advances, the use of MD5 as a
 DigestMethod and the use of MD5 in the RSA-MD5 SignatureMethod is NOT
 RECOMMENDED.  The concerned cryptographic advances do not effect the
 security of HMAC-MD5; however, there is little reason not to use one
 of the SHA series of algorithms.

Acknowledgements

 Glenn Adams, Merlin Hughs, Gregor Karlinger, Brian LaMachia, Shiho
 Moriai, Joseph Reagle, Russ Housley, and Joel Halpern.

Normative References

 [Camellia]         "Camellia: A 128-bit Block Cipher Suitable for
                    Multiple Platforms - Design and Analysis -", K.
                    Aoki, T. Ichikawa, M. Matsui, S. Moriai, J.
                    Nakajima, T. Tokita, In Selected Areas in
                    Cryptography, 7th Annual International Workshop,
                    SAC 2000, August 2000, Proceedings, Lecture Notes
                    in Computer Science 2012, pp. 39-56, Springer-
                    Verlag, 2001.
 [ECDSA]            Blake-Wilson, S., Karlinger, G., Kobayashi, T.,
                    and Y. Wang, "Using the Elliptic Curve Signature
                    Algorithm (ECDSA) for XML Digital Signatures", RFC
                    4050, April 2005.
 [FIPS-180-2]       "Secure Hash Standard", (SHA-1/256/384/512) US
                    Federal Information Processing Standard, 1 August
                    2002.
 [FIPS-180-2change] "FIPS 180-2, Secure Hash Standard Change Notice
                    1", adds SHA-224 to [FIPS 180-2], 25 February
                    2004.
 [FIPS-186-2]       "Digital Signature Standard", National Institute
                    of Standards and Technology, 2000.

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 13] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 [IEEE-P1363a]      "Standard Specifications for Public Key
                    Cryptography:  Additional Techniques", October
                    2002.
 [ISO/IEC-18033-2]  "Information technology -- Security techniques --
                    Encryption algorithms -- Part 3: Asymmetric
                    ciphers", CD, October 2002.
 [RFC1321]          Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm ",
                    RFC 1321, April 1992.
 [RFC2104]          Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC:
                    Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC
                    2104, February 1997.
 [RFC2119]          Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to
                    Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
                    March 1997.
 [RFC2396]          Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter,
                    "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic
                    Syntax", RFC 2396, August 1998.
 [RFC2405]          Madson, C. and N. Doraswamy, "The ESP DES-CBC
                    Cipher Algorithm With Explicit IV", RFC 2405,
                    November 1998.
 [RFC2315]          Kaliski, B., "PKCS #7: Cryptographic Message
                    Syntax Version 1.5", RFC 2315, March 1998.
 [RFC3075]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo, "XML-
                    Signature Syntax and Processing", RFC 3075, March
                    2001. (RFC 3075 was obsoleted by RFC 3275 but is
                    referenced in this document for its description of
                    Minimal Canonicalization which was dropped in RFC
                    3275.)
 [RFC3275]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo,
                    "(Extensible Markup Language) XML-Signature Syntax
                    and Processing", RFC 3275, March 2002.
 [RFC3394]          Schaad, J. and R. Housley, "Advanced Encryption
                    Standard (AES) Key Wrap Algorithm", RFC 3394,
                    September 2002.

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 14] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 [RFC3447]          Jonsson, J. and B. Kaliski, "Public-Key
                    Cryptography Standards (PKCS) #1: RSA Cryptography
                    Specifications Version 2.1", RFC 3447, February
                    2003.
 [RFC3713]          Matsui, M., Nakajima, J., and S. Moriai, "A
                    Description of the Camellia Encryption Algorithm",
                    RFC 3713, April 2004.
 [RFC3874]          Housley, R., "A 224-bit One-way Hash Function:
                    SHA-224", RFC 3874, September 2004.
 [RIPEMD-160]       ISO/IEC 10118-3:1998, "Information Technology -
                    Security techniques - Hash-functions - Part3:
                    Dedicated hash- functions", ISO, 1998.
 [X9.62]            X9.62-200X, "Public Key Cryptography for the
                    Financial Services Industry: The Elliptic Curve
                    Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)", Accredited
                    Standards Committee X9, American National
                    Standards Institute.
 [XMLDSIG]          "XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", D. Eastlake
                    3rd, J. Reagle, & D. Solo, 12 February 2002.
                    <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/>
 [XMLENC]           "XML Encryption Syntax and Processing", J. Reagle,
                    D.  Eastlake, December 2002.
                    <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/RED-xmlenc-core-
                    20021210/>
 [XPointer]         "XML Pointer Language (XPointer) Version 1.0", W3C
                    working draft, Steve DeRose, Eve Maler, Ron Daniel
                    Jr., January 2001.
                    <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xptr-20010108>

Informative References

 [CANON]            "Canonical XML Version 1.0", John Boyer.
                    <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315>.
 [EXCANON]          "Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0", D.
                    Eastlake, J. Reagle, 18 July 2002.
                    <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-enc-c14n-20020718/>.
 [RFC3076]          Boyer, J., "Canonical XML Version 1.0", RFC 3076,
                    March 2001.

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 15] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

 [RFC3092]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Manros, C., and E. Raymond,
                    "Etymology of "Foo"", RFC 3092, 2001.
 [RFC3741]          Boyer, J., Eastlake 3rd, D., and J. Reagle,
                    "Exclusive XML Canonicalization, Version 1.0", RFC
                    3741, March 2004.

Author's Address

 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
 Motorola Laboratories
 155 Beaver Street
 Milford, MA 01757 USA
 Phone: +1-508-786-7554 (w)
        +1-508-634-2066 (h)
 EMail: Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 16] RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005

Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
 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.

Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 17]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc4051.txt · Last modified: 2005/04/12 18:55 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki