From 11a782f66b348b4bf7065b49c846c1f262b0793a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Randy Bush Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 12:27:47 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] -04 with warren playing rfc editor and johnny comma-seed --- draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity.xml | 54 ++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) diff --git a/draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity.xml b/draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity.xml index 43e8884..e88e90e 100644 --- a/draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity.xml +++ b/draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-has-no-identity.xml @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ - + @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ - + @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ There is a false notion that Internet Number Resources (INRs) in - the RPKI can be associated with the real world identity of the 'owner' + the RPKI can be associated with the real-world identity of the 'owner' of an INR. This document attempts to put that notion to rest. @@ -74,22 +74,23 @@ The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), see , "Represents the allocation hierarchy of IP address space and Autonomous System (AS) numbers," which are - collectively known as Internet Number Resources (INRs). Though - since, it has grown to include other similar resource and routing - data, e.g. Router Keying for BGPsec, . + collectively known as Internet Number Resources (INRs). Since + initial deployment, the RPKI has grown to include other similar + resource and routing data, e.g. Router Keying for BGPsec, . - In security terms the phrase "Public Key" implies there is also a - corresponding private key . The RPKI's + In security terms, the phrase "Public Key" implies there is also + a corresponding private key . The RPKI's strong authority over ownership of INRs has misled some people toward a desire to use RPKI private keys to sign arbitrary documents attesting that the INR 'owner' of those resources has attested to the authenticity of the document content. But in reality, the RPKI - certificate is only an authorization to speak for for the explicitly + certificate is only an authorization to speak for the explicitly identified INRs; it is explicitly not intended for authentication of the 'owners' of the INRs. This situation is emphasized in Section 2.1 of . - It has been suggested that one could authenticate real world + It has been suggested that one could authenticate real-world business transactions with the signatures of INR holders. E.g. Bill's Bait and Sushi could use their AS in the RPKI to sign a Letter of Authorization (LOA) for some other party to rack and stack @@ -115,29 +116,28 @@ The RPKI was designed and specified to sign certificates for use within the RPKI itself and to generate Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs), , for use in routing. Its design - intentionally precluded use for attesting to real world identity as, + intentionally precluded use for attesting to real-world identity as, among other issues, it would expose the Certification Authority (CA) to liability. - That the RPKI does not authenticate real world identity is a - feature not a bug. If it tried to do so, aside from the liability, + That the RPKI does not authenticate real-world identity is a + feature, not a bug. If it tried to do so, aside from the liability, it would end in a world of complexity with no proof of termination, as X.400 learned. - Registries such as the Regional Internet Resistries (RIRs) - provide INR to real world identity mapping through whois and similar + Registries such as the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) + provide INR to real-world identity mapping through whois and similar services. They claim to be authoritative, at least for the INRs which they allocate. RPKI-based credentials of INRs MUST NOT be used to authenticate - real world documents or transactions without some formal external + real-world documents or transactions without some formal external authentication of the INR and the authority for the actually anonymous INR holder to authenticate the particular document or transaction. - Note that, if there is sufficient external, i.e. non-RPKI, - verifcation of authority, then use of RPKI-based credentials seems - superfluous. + Given sufficient external, i.e. non-RPKI, verification of + authority, the use of RPKI-based credentials seems superfluous. @@ -154,8 +154,8 @@ Normally, the INR holder does not hold the private key attesting to their resources; the Certification Authority (CA) does. The INR - holder has a real world business relationship with the CA for which - they have likely signed real world documents. + holder has a real-world business relationship with the CA for which + they have likely signed real-world documents. As the INR owner does not have the keying material, they rely on the CA, to which they presumably present credentials, to manipulate @@ -186,10 +186,10 @@ Government of Elbonia tomorrow. Or the resource could have been administratively moved from one CA to another, likely requiring a change of keys. If so, how does one determine if the signature on - the real world document is still valid? + the real-world document is still valid? While Ghostbuster Records may seem to - identify real world entities, their semantic content is completely + identify real-world entities, their semantic content is completely arbitrary, and does not attest to INR ownership. They are merely clues for operational support contact in case of technical RPKI problems. @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ are a valid legal representative of the organization in possession of that INR. They could be just an INR administrative person. - Autonomous System Numbers do not identify real world entities. + Autonomous System Numbers do not identify real-world entities. They are identifiers some network operators 'own' and are only used for loop detection in routing. They have no inherent semantics other than uniqueness. @@ -214,10 +214,10 @@
- Attempts to use RPKI data to authenticate real world documents or + Attempts to use RPKI data to authenticate real-world documents or other artifacts requiring identity are invalid and misleading. - When a document is signed with the private key associated with a + When a document is signed with the private key associated with an RPKI certificate, the signer is speaking for the INRs, the IP address space and Autonomous System (AS) numbers, in the certificate. This is not an identity; this is an authorization. In @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ authority. RPKI-based credentials of INRs MUST NOT be used to authenticate - real world documents or transactions without some formal external + real-world documents or transactions without some formal external authentication of the INR and the authority for the actually anonymous INR holder to authenticate the particular document or transaction.