Network Working Group M. Blinov Internet Draft Guardeonic Solutions Expires: 25 August 2004 C. Adams University of Ottawa 25 February 2004 Alternative Certificate Formats for the PKIX Certificate Management Protocols Status of This Memo Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract The PKIX (Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)) Working Group of the IETF (The Internet Engineering Task Force) has defined a number of certificate management protocols. These protocols are primarily focused on X.509v3 public-key certificates. However, it is sometimes desirable to manage certificates in alternative formats as well. This document specifies how such certificates may be requested using the CRMF (Certificate Request Message Format) syntax that is used by several different protocols. It also explains how alternative certificate formats may be incorporated into such popular protocols as PKIX-CMP (PKIX Certificate Management Protocol) and CMC (Certificate Management Messages over CMS). Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 1] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 1. Introduction Full certificate life-cycle management in a Public-Key Infrastructure (PKI) requires protocol support in order to achieve automated processing and end user transparency. Such protocols require standardization in order to allow more than one vendor to supply various pieces -- End Entity (EE), Certification Authority (CA), Registration Authority (RA) -- in the PKI deployment of a single organization, or to allow multiple, independently-deployed PKIs to be interconnected usefully. The IETF PKIX (Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)) Working Group currently has several certificate management protocols and certificate request syntax specifications on the standards track. Although these specifications are primarily focused on X.509v3 public-key certificates, some of them can be easily extended to handle certificates in alternative formats as well. This document focuses on a popular certificate request syntax called CRMF (Certificate Request Message Format) [CRMF]. Although the original specification of CRMF is X509 specific, extensions have already been proposed to allow for alternative certificate templates [CMP]. However, those extensions have only defined a framework, they did not define the exact format to be used for various certificate types. This document builds on top of the framework mentioned above and defines how CRMF can be used to request certificates of the following types: - X.509 attribute certificates [ATTCERT] - OpenPGP certificates [OPENPGP] The CRMF syntax is used by such popular protocols as PKIX-CMP (PKIX Certificate Management Protocol) [CMP] and CMC (Certificate Management Messages over CMS) [CMC]. This means that CRMF extensions proposed in this document enable these protocols to request certificates of the above types. However, it is not enough to be able to request a certificate. The protocol should be prepared to handle certificates of a particular type and, for example, return them to the user. This document proposes extensions to the PKIX-CMP and CMC protocols that are required to manage certificates in alternative formats. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 2] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 2. Certificate Template One of the features of the CRMF format is its use of the CertTemplate construct, which allows a requester (EE, or RA acting on behalf of an EE) to specify as much or as little as they wish regarding the content of the requested certificate. It is explicitly noted that the CA has final authority over the actual certificate content; that is, the CA may alter certificate fields or may add, delete, or alter extensions according to its operating policy (if the resulting certificate is unacceptable to the EE or RA, then that certificate may be rejected and/or revoked prior to any publication/use). A similar flexibility in the request must be available for alternative certificate types as well. For this purpose, an AltCertTemplate extension was introduced in [CMP] as follows (where id-regCtrl = {1 3 6 1 5 5 7 5 1} as defined in [CRMF]). CertRequest ::= SEQUENCE { certReqId INTEGER, certTemplate CertTemplate, controls Controls OPTIONAL } -- If certTemplate is an empty SEQUENCE (i.e., all fields -- omitted), then controls MAY contain the -- id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate control, specifying a template -- for a certificate other than an X.509v3 public-key -- certificate. Conversely, if certTemplate is not empty -- (i.e., at least one field is present), then controls -- MUST NOT contain id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate. The new -- control is defined as follows: id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= {id-regCtrl 7} AltCertTemplate ::= AttributeTypeAndValue In this section, an AltCertTemplate is specified for each of the alternative certificate types defined in Section 1. 2.1. X.509 Attribute Certificate CertTemplate A CertTemplate for an X.509 attribute certificate can be used by simply defining an object identifier (OID) and corresponding value for use in the id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate control. These are specified as follows. OID: id-acTemplate OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= {id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate xx} Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 3] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 Value: AttCertTemplate ::= SEQUENCE { version AttCertVersion OPTIONAL, holder Holder OPTIONAL, issuer AttCertIssuer OPTIONAL, signature AlgorithmIdentifier OPTIONAL, serialNumber CertificateSerialNumber OPTIONAL, attrCertValidityPeriod OptionalAttCertValidity OPTIONAL, attributes SEQUENCE OF Attribute OPTIONAL, issuerUniqueID UniqueIdentifier OPTIONAL, extensions Extensions OPTIONAL } OptionalAttCertValidity ::= SEQUENCE { notBeforeTime GeneralizedTime OPTIONAL, notAfterTime GeneralizedTime OPTIONAL } -- at least one must be present 2.2. OpenPGP Certificate CertTemplate Similar to certificate templates defined above, a CertTemplate for an OpenPGP certificate can be used by defining an object identifier (OID) and corresponding value for use in the id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate control. These are specified as follows: OID: id-openPGPCertTemplateExt OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= {id-regCtrl-altCertTemplate zz} Value: OpenPGPCertTemplateExtended ::= SEQUENCE { nativeTemplate OpenPGPCertTemplate, controls Controls OPTIONAL } OpenPGPCertTemplate ::= OCTET STRING -- contains the OpenPGP CertTemplate data structure defined -- below (binary format without Radix-64 conversions) -- encoded as an ASN.1 OCTET STRING 2.2.1. OpenPGP CertTemplate Data Structure Similar to the X.509 CertTemplate, the OpenPGP CertTemplate is an OpenPGP certificate (OpenPGP Transferable Public Key) [OPENPGP] with all fields optional. The essential elements of an OpenPGP Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 4] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 CertTemplate are: - Zero or one Public Key packet. - Zero or more Direct Key Self Signature packets. - Zero or more Certification Signature packets [only if no User ID packets are present]. - Zero or more User ID packets. - After each User ID packet, zero or more Certification Signature packets. - Zero or more Subkey packets. - After each Subkey packet, zero or one Subkey Binding Signature packet. Each packet in the OpenPGP CertTemplate MUST be a syntactically correct OpenPGP packet. This will enable conformant implementations to use existing PGP libraries for building and parsing OpenPGP CertTemplates. The following implications of this rule should be explicitly noted: - Fields for which the OpenPGP specification defines a set of permitted values (e.g. the signature type or the public key algorithm fields of the Signature packet) MUST have a value from the defined set. Even if the requester does not have any particular preferences for, for example, the signature algorithm, it MUST choose one value that is the most desirable. Rationale: An alternative solution could be to define extra "any" values, but this would be a modification of the OpenPGP syntax which is not considered to be appropriate in this document. - All subpackets of the Signature packet defined by the OpenPGP specification as mandatory (e.g. the creation time and the issuer's key id subpackets) MUST be present even though they do not make much sense in the context of a certificate request. - The number of MPIs at the end of the Key Material and the Signature packets MUST match the number defined by the OpenPGP specification for the given algorithm (the algorithm is controlled by the value of the "algorithm" field). For example, there should be 2 MPIs for DSA signatures. Note that the OpenPGP specification does not define validation rules for the content of those MPIs. Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 5] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 Though it is not considered appropriate here to define extra "any" values for fields of enumerated types, such values can still be defined for some other fields where the OpenPGP specification is not that strict. The following extra values are defined in the context of the OpenPGP CertTemplate. Note that these definitions do not modify the syntax of OpenPGP packets and existing PGP libraries can still be used to generate and parse them. - For fields representing time (e.g. signature creation time): the value of zero means "any time". - For fields holding key IDs: the value of 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF means "any key id". - For signature fields: the "any signature" value is encoded as a sequence of MPIs such that: * the number of MPIs matches the number of MPIs defined by the OpenPGP specification for the given algorithm, and * the value of each MPI is 0xFF. A Signature packet with the "any" value in the signature fields is called a Signature Template. Example: The "any signature" value for a DSA signature would look like [00 08 FF 00 08 FF] - For key material fields: the "any key" value is encoded as a sequence of MPIs such that: * the number of MPIs matches the number of MPIs defined by the OpenPGP specification for the given algorithm, and * the value of at least one of the MPIs is a bit string with all its bits set to 1. A Key Material packet with the "any" value in the key material fields is called a Key Template. (See Key Template section for further details.) Example: The "any key" value for a DSA public key may look like [00 08 FF 00 10 FF FF 00 10 85 34 00 08 FF] The following rules apply to the sequence of packets within the OpenPGP CertTemplate: Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 6] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 - If the Public Key packet is omitted from the OpenPGP CertTemplate then this CertTemplate does not constrain the value of the public key, i.e. it refers to "any" public key. - The order of Signature packets following a User ID packet and the order of User ID packets within the CertTemplate are not important. - If an OpenPGP CertTemplate does not contain any User ID packets then it refers to "any" user ids that are relevant to a given request. 2.2.2. OpenPGP CertTemplate in Certificate Requests Since an OpenPGP certificate can have several certification signatures, the OpenPGP CertTemplate uses Signature Templates to define where certification signatures should occur. The values of the fields of the Signature Templates define the parameters of the new certification signatures. The following rules apply: - A Signature Template that is present in the list of signatures following a User ID packet requests the CA to certify this User ID and the public key and replace the Signature Template with the new certification signature. The Signature Template does not mandate the exact place of the certification signature within the list. The certification signature may be inserted at any position within the list of signatures (following the certified User ID packet). - A Signature Template may be present in the OpenPGP CertTemplate without any preceding User ID packet. In this case it is assumed that the CA knows the ID(s) of the user by some other means. A Signature Template without a preceding User ID requests the CA to insert all known User IDs of the user to the OpenPGP certificate and certify each of them. The Signature Template defines the parameters of these certification signatures. - If an OpenPGP CertTemplate contains no Signature Templates then the CA is requested to certify all User IDs that are present in the OpenPGP CertTemplate. Such a CertTemplate does not define parameters of the certification signatures explicitly, but the CA SHOULD use parameters of the certification self-signatures (if present in the CertTemplate) as a guidance (e.g. key flags fields). - If neither Signature Templates nor User IDs are present in the OpenPGP CertTemplate then the CA is expected to know the ID(s) of the user by some other means. In this case the CertTemplate requests the CA to insert these User IDs into the OpenPGP Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 7] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 certificate and certify each of them. The parameters of the certification signatures are left to the CA. If several certification signatures have to be produced according to an OpenPGP CertTemplate and any of them can not be granted (even with modifications) for whatever reason then the whole request with this OpenPGP CertTemplate MUST be rejected. The client SHOULD provide enough information in its request so that the CA could produce a complete OpenPGP certificate. For example, the client SHOULD include in the template all relevant subkeys with their binding signatures so that the CA can include them in the resultant OpenPGP certificate as well. Rationale: In some environments the CA/RA is responsible for publishing certificates. 2.2.3. Key Templates and Central Key Generation The OpenPGP CertTemplate can also be used to request certification of centrally-generated keys. This is accomplished by using Key Templates. If the Public Key packet of an OpenPGP CertTemplate is a Key Template then this OpenPGP CertTemplate requests the CA/RA to generate the key pair prior to certifying it. Fields of the Key Template define parameters of the new key pair as follows (see examples in the Appendix): - The "public key algorithm" field specifies the algorithm to be used for the key generation. - MPI fields with the value of 0xFF ([00 08 FF]) specify that no constraint is placed on the corresponding part of the key. - MPI fields that contain any other bit strings with all bits set to 1 specify that the corresponding part of the key should be of the same length as the length of the MPI (e.g. the length of the public modulus n of the RSA key). - MPI fields that contain any other values specify that the corresponding part of the key should be of the given value (key generation parameters). In order to return a complete OpenPGP certificate, in addition to certifying the new key and the User ID, the CA (or RA) SHOULD also create a self-signature (i.e. sign the new public key and the User ID with the new private key) and include it after the User ID packet. This SHOULD be done for all User IDs certified by the CA. Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 8] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 If a Subkey packet of an OpenPGP CertTemplate is a Key Template then this OpenPGP CertTemplate requests the CA/RA to generate a subkey. Fields of the Key Template define parameters of the new subkey. The new subkey obviously does not have to be certified. However, the CA/RA SHOULD produce the binding signature and include it after the subkey, if the CA/RA knows the user's primary private key (e.g. it was centrally generated as well). Note that if the CA/RA does not know the user's primary private key then the resultant OpenPGP certificate returned from the CA/RA to the client will be incomplete (i.e. there will be no binding signature for the subkey). It will be the responsibility of the client to produce and add the binding signature and to publish the final OpenPGP certificate. If an OpenPGP CertTemplate contains neither PublicKey/Subkey packets nor Key Template packets then it requests the CA to generate keys/subkeys according to the CA's policies. 2.2.4. OpenPGPCertTemplateExtended The OpenPGPCertTemplateExtended structure enables additional extensions and controls to be added to the basic OpenPGP CertTemplate. 2.2.5. OpenPGP CertTemplate Required Profile A conformant implementation is REQUIRED to support OpenPGP CertTemplates that are valid OpenPGP certificates, i.e. that have the following structure (see examples in the Appendix): - One Public Key packet (not a Key Template). - Zero or more Direct Key Self Signature packets (without Signature Templates). - One or more User ID packets. - After each User ID packet, zero or more Certification Signature packets (without Signature Templates). - Zero or more Subkey packets (without Key Templates). - After each Subkey packet, one Subkey Binding Signature packet (not a Signature Template). A conformant implementation is REQUIRED to recognise Key Templates and Signature Templates and is REQUIRED to either support them or reject requests containing them if it does not. Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 9] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 3. Proof of Possession A CRMF request includes a Proof of Possession (POP) field that contains proof that an End Entity has possession of the private key corresponding to the public key for which a certificate is requested. The following rule applies to this field (with modifications from [CMP]): * NOTE: If CertReqMsg certReq certTemplate * (or the altCertTemplate control) contains the subject and publicKey * values, then poposkInput MUST be omitted and the signature MUST be * computed on the DER-encoded value of CertReqMsg certReq (or the DER- * encoded value of AltCertTemplate). It is considered that an OpenPGP CertTemplate satisfies the conditions of this note if it has a Public Key packet (not a Key Template) and at least one User ID packet. 4. Protocol-specific Issues This section explains how alternative certificate formats may be incorporated into such popular protocols as PKIX-CMP and CMC. 4.1. PKIX-CMP In PKIX-CMP, the ASN.1 [ASN1] construct, and corresponding comment, for a certificate is given as follows. CMPCertificate ::= CHOICE { x509v3PKCert Certificate } -- This syntax, while bits-on-the-wire compatible with the standard -- X.509 definition of "Certificate", allows the possibility of future -- certificate types (such as X.509 attribute certificates, WAP WTLS -- certificates, or other kinds of certificates) within this -- certificate management protocol, should a need ever arise to support -- such generality. Building on this framework, then, this document expands the above CHOICE construct as follows. CMPCertificate ::= CHOICE { x509v3PKCert Certificate, x509v2AttCert [0] AttributeCertificate, -- defined in [ATTCERT] Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 10] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 openPGPCert [2] OpenPGPCert } OpenPGPCert ::= OCTET STRING -- contains the OpenPGP certificate (OpenPGP Transferable -- Public Key) data structure from the OpenPGP specification -- [OPENPGP] (binary format without Radix-64 conversions), -- encoded as an ASN.1 OCTET STRING Expanding the CHOICE construct as above allows X.509 attribute certificates and OpenPGP certificates to be used within the PKIX-CMP management messages. In the future, this construct may be expanded further (in subsequent revisions of this document) to accommodate other certificate types if this is found to be necessary. 4.2. CMC CMC protocol uses the CMS (Cryptographic Message Syntax) syntax [CMS], which defines the certificate type as CertificateChoices ::= CHOICE { certificate Certificate, extendedCertificate [0] IMPLICIT ExtendedCertificate, -- Obsolete v1AttrCert [1] IMPLICIT AttributeCertificateV1, -- Obsolete v2AttrCert [2] IMPLICIT AttributeCertificateV2 } Similarly to PKIX-CMP, this CHOICE can be extended to include additional types of certificates as follows. CertificateChoices ::= CHOICE { certificate Certificate, extendedCertificate [0] IMPLICIT ExtendedCertificate, -- Obsolete v1AttrCert [1] IMPLICIT AttributeCertificateV1, -- Obsolete v2AttrCert [2] IMPLICIT AttributeCertificateV2, openPGPCert [3] IMPLICIT OpenPGPCert } This allows both X.509 attribute certificates and OpenPGP certificates to be used within the CMC management messages. In the future, this construct may be expanded further (in subsequent revisions of this document) to accommodate other certificate types if this is found to be necessary. The CMC specification defines certain constraints on the subject and publicKey fields of the CRMF's CertTemplate structure. The same constraints should apply to the AltCertTemplate structure if alternative certificate types are used. For example, the CMC specification mandates that Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 11] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 When CRMF message bodies are used in the Full Enrollment Request message, each CRMF message MUST include both the subject and publicKey fields in the CertTemplate. If alternative certificate types are used, this should be extended as When CRMF message bodies are used in the Full Enrollment Request message, each CRMF message MUST include both the subject and publicKey fields in the CertTemplate (or in the altCertTemplate control). 5. Security Considerations This entire memo is about security. It describes a mechanism that may be used to incorporate multiple certificate formats into the CRMF certificate request syntax as well as in PKIX-CMP and CMC certificate management protocols. Appendix A. Examples of OpenPGP CertTemplates This Appendix presents examples of OpenPGP CertTemplates that are used for requesting OpenPGP certificates from a CA. A1. Simple Certificate Request Alice requests an OpenPGP certificate for her public key accompanied by a subkey. The content of the OpenPGP CertTemplate in the request is as follows. This CertTemplate conforms to the OpenPGP CertTemplate Required Profile. 0000: 99 01 A2 === Pub Key packet === 0003: 04 3C 58 27 A2 11 ver 4, created 30 Jan 2002, DSA 0009: 00 E3 FB 9D .. 2B EF DSA prime p 008B: 00 A0 FF 7E .. BA 71 DSA group order q 00A1: 03 FF 68 BC .. 56 71 DSA group generator g 0123: 03 FE 38 1F .. F2 63 DSA public key value y 01A5: B4 16 === User ID packet === 01A7: 41 6C .. 6D 3E "Alice " 01BD: 89 00 49 === Signature packet (self-signature) === 01C0: 04 10 11 02 ver 4, gen cert, DSA, SHA1 01C4: 00 09 05 02 3C 58 27 A2 02 1B 03 created 30 Jan 2002, key usage: sign data and certify other keys 01CF: 00 0A 09 10 43 5C .. 06 77 issuer key id Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 12] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 01DB: 5A C2 left 16 bits of signed hash value 01DD: 00 A0 EB 00 .. 1B 75 DSA value r 01F3: 00 A0 F4 E4 .. A8 3D DSA value s 0209: B9 02 0D === Public Subkey packet === 020C: 04 3C 58 27 A2 10 ver 4, created 30 Jan 2002, Elgamal (encrypt-only) algorithm 0212: 08 00 F6 42 .. 0B 3B Elgamal prime p 0314: 00 02 02 Elgamal group generator g 0317: 07 FE 37 BA .. DF 21 Elgamal public key value y 0419: 89 00 49 === Signature packet (subkey binding) === 041C: 04 18 11 02 ver 4, subkey binding, DSA, SHA1 0420: 00 09 05 02 3C 58 27 A2 02 1B 0C created 30 Jan 2002, key usage: encrypt communications and storage 042B: 00 0A 09 10 43 5C .. 06 77 issuer key id 0437: C7 DE left 16 bits of signed hash value 0439: 00 9E 21 33 .. 39 1B DSA value r 044F: 00 9F 64 D7 .. 63 08 DSA value s 0465: CA certifies Alice's User ID and the public key and creates the following OpenPGP certificate: 0000: 99 01 A2 === Pub Key packet === 0003: 01A5: B4 16 === User ID packet === 01A7: 01BD: 89 00 49 === Signature packet (self-signature) === 01C0: 0209: 89 00 49 === Signature packet (certification) === 020C: 04 13 11 02 ver 4, positive cert, DSA, SHA1 0210: 00 09 05 02 3C 58 28 1A 02 1B 03 created 30 Jan 2002, key usage: sign data and certify other keys 021B: 00 0A 09 10 F0 0D .. 1F CA issuer key id 0227: 06 DF left 16 bits of signed hash value 0229: 00 9F 57 2D .. 26 E3 DSA value r 023F: 00 A0 B3 02 .. CE 65 DSA value s 0255: B9 02 0D === Public Subkey packet === 0258: 0465: 89 00 49 === Signature packet (subkey binding) === 0468: 04B1: Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 13] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 A2. Certificate Request with Central Key Generation Alice requests the CA to generate an RSA key pair that will be used for signing and another RSA key pair that will be used for encryption and to certify these keys. The RSA keys are requested to be 2048 bits long with the public exponent 65537. The content of the OpenPGP CertTemplate in the request is as follows: 0000: 99 01 0D === Pub Key packet (Template) === 0003: 04 FF FF FF FF 01 ver 4, any creation date, RSA 0009: 08 00 FF FF .. FF FF RSA public modulus n - given length 010B: 00 11 01 00 01 RSA public exponent e 0110: B4 16 === User ID packet === 0112: 41 6C .. 6D 3E "Alice " 0128: 89 00 23 === Signature packet (Template) === 012B: 04 10 11 02 ver 4, gen cert, DSA, SHA1 012F: 00 09 05 02 FF FF FF FF 02 1B 03 any creation date, key usage: sign data and certify other keys 013A: 00 0A 09 10 FF FF .. FF FF issuer key id - any 0146: 05 3A left 16 bits of signed hash value 0148: 00 08 FF DSA value r - any 014B: 00 08 FF DSA value s - any 014E: 99 01 0D === Public Subkey packet (Template) === 0151: 04 FF FF FF FF 01 ver 4, any creation date, RSA 0157: 08 00 FF FF .. FF FF RSA public modulus n - given length 0259: 00 11 01 00 01 RSA public exponent e 025E: 89 00 20 === Signature packet (Template) === 0261: 04 18 01 02 ver 4, subkey binding, RSA, SHA1 0265: 00 09 05 02 FF FF FF FF 02 1B 0C any creation date, key usage: encrypt communications and storage 0270: 00 0A 09 10 FF FF .. FF FF issuer key id - any 027C: 12 E6 left 16 bits of signed hash value 027E: 00 08 FF RSA signature value - any 0281: CA generates keys, certifies Alice's User ID and the public key and creates the following OpenPGP certificate: 0000: 99 01 0D === Pub Key packet === 0003: 04 3C 5A A5 BB 01 ver 4, created 01 Feb 2002, RSA 0009: 08 00 C7 21 .. 5B EB RSA public modulus n 010B: 00 11 01 00 01 RSA public exponent e 0110: B4 16 === User ID packet === 0112: 41 6C .. 6D 3E "Alice " 0128: 89 01 1F === Signature packet (self-signature) === Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 14] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 012B: 04 10 01 02 ver 4, gen cert, RSA, SHA1 012F: 00 09 05 02 3C 5A A5 BB 02 1B 03 created 01 Feb 2002, key usage: sign data and certify other keys 013A: 00 0A 09 10 8E AF .. 1A 18 issuer key id 0146: 3B 21 left 16 bits of signed hash value 0148: 07 FE 2F 1D .. C0 81 RSA signature value 024A: 89 00 49 === Signature packet (certification) === 024D: 04 13 11 02 ver 4, positive cert, DSA, SHA1 0251: 00 09 05 02 3C 5A A5 DC 02 1B 03 created 01 Feb 2002, key usage: sign data and certify other keys 025C: 00 0A 09 10 F0 0D .. 1F CA issuer key id 0268: BA C2 left 16 bits of signed hash value 026A: 00 9F 5E 58 .. 30 B3 DSA value r 0280: 00 A0 D1 D7 .. 5A AF DSA value s 0296: 99 01 0D === Public Subkey packet === 0299: 04 3C 5A A5 C5 01 ver 4, created 01 Feb 2002, RSA 029F: 08 00 C3 03 .. 8C 53 RSA public modulus n 03A1: 00 11 01 00 01 RSA public exponent e 03A6: 89 01 1F === Signature packet (subkey binding) === 03A9: 04 18 01 02 ver 4, subkey binding, RSA, SHA1 03AD: 00 09 05 02 3C 5A A5 C5 05 1B 0C created 01 Feb 2002, key usage: encrypt communications and storage 03B8: 00 0A 09 10 8E AF .. 1A 18 issuer key id 03C4: C8 44 left 16 bits of signed hash value 03C6: 07 FB 04 D7 .. 75 BE RSA signature value 04C8: Normative references [ASN1] CCITT Recommendation X.208: Specification of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1), 1988. [ATTCERT] Farrell, S. and R. Housley, "An Internet Attribute Certificate: Profile for Authorization", RFC 3281, April 2002. [CMC] Myers, M., Liu, X., Schaad, J., and J. Weinstein, "Certificate Management Messages over CMS", RFC 2797, April 2000. [CMS] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", RFC 3369, August 2002. Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 15] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 [CMP] Adams, C. and S. Farrell, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure: Certificate Management Protocols", Internet Draft draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2510bis-08.txt, Work in progress. [CRMF] Myers, M., Adams, C., Solo, D., and D. Kemp, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure: Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF)", Internet Draft draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2511bis-06.txt, Work in progress. [OPENPGP] Callas, J., Donnerhacke, L., Finney, H. and R. Thayer, "OpenPGP Message Format", RFC 2440, November 1998. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. Author's Address Questions about this memo can be directed to: Mikhail Blinov Guardeonic Solutions Fitzwilliam Court, Leeson Close Dublin 2, Ireland e-mail: mikhail.blinov@guardeonic.com Carlisle Adams School of Information Technology and Engineering (SITE) University of Ottawa 800 King Edward Avenue P.O. Box 450, Stn A Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1N 6N5 e-mail: cadams@site.uottawa.ca Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). 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 Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 16] Internet Draft Alternative Certificate Formats 25 February 2004 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." Blinov, et al. Expires 25 August 2004 [Page 17]