This Key Management Interoperability Protocol Usage Guide is
intended to complement the Key Management Interoperability Protocol
Specification [KMIP-Spec] by providing guidance on
how to implement the Key Management Interoperability Protocol (KMIP) most
effectively to ensure interoperability. In particular, it includes the
following guidance:
·
Clarification of assumptions and requirements that drive or
influence the design of KMIP and the implementation of KMIP-compliant key
management.
·
Specific recommendations for implementation of particular KMIP
functionality.
·
Clarification of mandatory and optional capabilities for
conformant implementations.
·
Functionality considered for inclusion in KMIP V1.0, but deferred
to subsequent versions of the standard.
A selected set of conformance profiles and authentication
suites are defined in the KMIP Profiles specification [KMIP-Prof],
Further assistance for implementing KMIP is provided by the
KMIP Use Cases for Proof of Concept Testing document [KMIP-UC]
that describes a set of recommended test cases and provides the TTLV (Tag/Type/Length/Value)
format for the message exchanges defined by those use cases.
For a list of terminologies refer to [KMIP-Spec].
[FIPS186-3] Digital Signature Standard (DSS), FIPS PUB 186-3, June 2009, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips186-3/fips_186-3.pdf
[FIPS197] Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), FIPS PUB 197, November 26,
2001, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips197/fips-197.pdf
[FIPS198-1] The Keyed-Hash Message
Authentication Code (HMAC), FIPS PUB 198-1, July 2008, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips198-1/FIPS-198-1_final.pdf
[IEEE1003-1] IEEE Std 1003.1, Standard for information technology - portable
operating system interface (POSIX). Shell and utilities, 2004.
[ISO16609] ISO, Banking -- Requirements
for message authentication using symmetric techniques, ISO 16609, 1991.
[ISO9797-1] ISO/IEC, Information
technology -- Security techniques -- Message Authentication Codes (MACs) --
Part 1: Mechanisms using a block cipher, ISO/IEC 9797-1, 1999.
[KMIP-Spec] OASIS Committee Draft 06, Key Management Interoperability Protocol
Specification Version 1.0, November 2009. http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/spec/v1.0/cd06/kmip-spec-1.0-cd-06.doc
[KMIP-Prof] OASIS Committee Draft 04, Key Management Interoperability Protocol Profiles Version
1.0, November
2009. http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/profiles/v1.0/cd04/kmip-profiles-1.0-cd-04.doc
[PKCS#1] RSA Laboratories, PKCS #1 v2.1: RSA
Cryptography Standard, June 14, 2002, http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2125
[PKCS#5] RSA Laboratories, PKCS
#5 v2.1: Password-Based Cryptography Standard, October 5, 2006, http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2127
[PKCS#7] RSA
Laboratories, PKCS#7 v1.5: Cryptographic Message Syntax Standard. November
1, 1993, http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2129
[PKCS#8] RSA
Laboratories, PKCS#8 v1.2: Private-Key Information Syntax Standard, November 1,
1993, http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2130
[PKCS#10] RSA Laboratories,
PKCS #10 v1.7: Certification Request Syntax Standard, May 26, 2000, http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2132
[RFC1319] B. Kaliski, The MD2
Message-Digest Algorithm, IETF RFC 1319, Apr 1992, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1319.txt
[RFC1320] R. Rivest, The MD4
Message-Digest Algorithm, IETF RFC 1320, Apr 1992, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1320.txt
[RFC1321] R. Rivest, The MD5
Message-Digest Algorithm, IETF RFC 1321, Apr 1992, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1321.txt
[RFC1421] J. Linn, Privacy Enhancement
for Internet Electronic Mail: Part I: Message Encryption and Authentication
Procedures¸IETF
RFC 1421, Feb 1993, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1421.txt
[RFC1424] B. Kaliski, Privacy
Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part IV: Key Certification and
Related Services, IETF RFC 1424, February 1993, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1424.txt
[RFC2104] H. Krawczyk, M. Bellare, R.
Canetti, HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication, IETF RFC 2104.
Feb 1007, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2104.txt
[RFC2119] S. Bradner, Key
words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt,
IETF RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2898] B. Kaliski, PKCS #5:
Password-Based Cryptography Specification Version 2.0, IETF RFC 2898, Sep
2000, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2898.txt
[RFC3394] J. Schaad, R. Housley, Advanced
Encryption Standard (AES) Key Wrap Algorithm, IETF RFC 3394, Sep 2002, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3394.txt
[RFC3447] J. Jonsson, B. Kaliski, Public-Key
Cryptography Standards (PKCS) #1: RSA Cryptography Specifications Version 2.1,
IETF RFC 3447 Feb 2003, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3447.txt
[RFC3629] F. Yergeau, UTF-8, a
transformation format of ISO 10646, IETF RFC 3629, Nov 2003, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3629.txt
[RFC3647] S. Chokhani, W.
Ford, R. Sabett, C. Merrill, and S. Wu, RFC3647: Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate Policy and Certification Practices Framework,
November 2003, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3647.txt
[RFC4210] C. Adams, S.
Farrell, T. Kause and T. Mononen, RFC2510: Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), September 2005, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4210.txt
[RFC4211] J. Schaad, RFC
4211: Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate Request Message
Format (CRMF), September 2005, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4211.txt
[RFC4868] S. Kelly, S. Frankel, Using
HMAC-SHA-256, HMAC-SHA-384, and HMAC-SHA-512 with IPsec, IETF RFC 4868, May
2007, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4868.txt
[RFC4949] R. Shirey, RFC4949:
Internet Security Glossary, Version 2, August 2007, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4949.txt
[RFC5272] J. Schaad and
M. Meyers, RFC5272: Certificate Management over CMS (CMC), June 2008, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5272.txt
[RFC5280] D. Cooper, S.
Santesson, S. Farrell, S. Boeyen, R. Housley and W. Polk, RFC 5280: Internet
X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile, May 2008, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5280.txt
[RFC5649] R. Housley, Advanced
Encryption Standard (AES) Key Wrap with Padding Algorithm, IETF RFC 5649,
Aug 2009, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5649.txt
[SP800-38A] M. Dworkin, Recommendation
for Block Cipher Modes of Operation – Methods and Techniques, NIST Special
Publication 800-38A, Dec 2001, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-38a/sp800-38a.pdf
[SP800-38B] M. Dworkin, Recommendation
for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: The CMAC Mode for Authentication, NIST
Special Publication 800-38B, May 2005, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-38B/SP_800-38B.pdf
[SP800-38C] M. Dworkin, Recommendation
for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: the CCM Mode for Authentication and
Confidentiality, NIST Special Publication 800-38C, May 2004, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-38C/SP800-38C_updated-July20_2007.pdf
[SP800-38D] M. Dworkin, Recommendation
for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) and GMAC,
NIST Special Publication 800-38D, Nov 2007, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-38D/SP-800-38D.pdf
[SP800-38E] M. Dworkin, Recommendation
for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: The XTS-AES Mode for Confidentiality on
Block-Oriented Storage Devices, NIST Special Publication 800-38E, Aug 2009
(draft), http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/drafts/800-38E/draft-sp800-38E.pdf
[SP800-56A] E. Barker, D. Johnson, and M.
Smid, Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key Establishment Schemes Using Discrete
Logarithm Cryptography (Revised), NIST Special Publication 800-56A, March
2007, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-56A/SP800-56A_Revision1_Mar08-2007.pdf
[SP800-57-1] E. Barker, W. Barker, W. Burr, W. Polk, and M. Smid, Recommendations
for Key Management - Part 1: General (Revised), NIST Special Publication
800-57 part 1, March 2007, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-57/sp800-57-Part1-revised2_Mar08-2007.pdf
[SP800-67] W. Barker, Recommendation for
the Triple Data Encryption Algorithm (TDEA) Block Cipher, NIST Special
Publication 800-67, Version 1.1, Revised 19 May 2008, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-67/SP800-67.pdf
[SP800-108] L. Chen, Recommendation
for Key Derivation Using Pseudorandom Functions (Revised), NIST Special
Publication 800-108, October 2009, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-108/sp800-108.pdf
[X.509] International
Telecommunication Union (ITU)–T, X.509: Information technology – Open systems
interconnection – The Directory: Public-key and attribute certificate
frameworks, August 2005, http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.509-200508-I/en
[X9.24-1] ANSI, X9.24: Retail Financial Services Symmetric Key
Management - Part 1: Using Symmetric Techniques, 2004.
[X9.31] ANSI, X9.31: Digital Signatures Using Reversible Public
Key Cryptography for the Financial Services Industry (rDSA),
September 1998.
[X9.42] ANSI, X9-42: Public Key
Cryptography for the Financial Services Industry: Agreement of Symmetric Keys
Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography, 2003.
[X9-57] ANSI, X9-57: Public Key Cryptography for the
Financial Services Industry: Certificate Management, 1997.
[X9.62] ANSI, X9-62: Public Key Cryptography for the
Financial Services Industry, The Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm
(ECDSA), 2005.
[X9-63] ANSI, X9-63: Public Key Cryptography for the
Financial Services Industry, Key Agreement and Key Transport Using Elliptic
Curve Cryptography, 2001.
[X9-102] ANSI, X9-102: Symmetric Key Cryptography for the Financial
Services Industry - Wrapping of Keys and Associated Data, 2008.
[X9 TR-31] ANSI,
X9 TR-31: Interoperable Secure Key Exchange Key Block Specification for
Symmetric Algorithms, 2005.
[KMIP-UC] OASIS Committee Draft 05, Key Management Interoperability Protocol Use Cases Version
1.0, November
2009. http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/usecases/v1.0/cd05/kmip-usecases-1.0-cd-05.doc
The section describes assumptions that underlie the KMIP
protocol and the implementation of clients and servers that utilize the
protocol.
2.1 Island
of Trust
Clients may be provided key material by the server, but they
only use that keying material for the purposes explicitly listed in the
delivery payload. Clients that ignore these instructions and use the keys in
ways not explicitly allowed by the server are non-compliant. There is no
requirement for the key management system, however, to enforce this behavior.
KMIP
relies on the chosen authentication suite as specified in [KMIP-Prof]
to authenticate the client and on the underlying transport protocol to provide
confidentiality, integrity, message authentication and protection against
replay attack. KMIP offers a wrapping mechanism for the Key Value that does not
rely on the transport mechanism used for the messages; the wrapping mechanism is
intended for importing or exporting managed cryptographic objects.
The
protocol operates on the assumption that the server is state-less, which means
that there is no concept of “sessions” inherent in the protocol. State-less
server operation is much more reliable and easier to implement than stateful
operation, and is consistent with possible implementation scenarios, such as
web-services-based servers. This does not mean that the server itself maintains
no state, only that the protocol does not require this.
The
protocol provides for “private” or vendor-specific extensions, which allow for
differentiation among vendor implementations. However, any objects, attributes
and operations included in an implementation are always implemented as
specified in [KMIP-Spec], regardless of whether they
are optional or mandatory.
The
protocol supports all reasonable key management system-related cryptographic
objects. This list currently includes:
·
Symmetric Keys
·
Split (multi-part) Keys
·
Asymmetric Key Pairs and their components
·
Digital Certificates
·
Derived Keys
·
Secret Data
·
Opaque (non-interpretable) cryptographic objects
The protocol operates primarily in a client-server,
message-based model. This means that most protocol exchanges are initiated by a
client sending a request message to a server, which then sends a response to
the client. The protocol also provides optional mechanisms to allow for
unsolicited notification of events to clients using the Notify operation, and
unsolicited delivery of cryptographic objects to clients using the Put
operation; that is, the protocol allows a “push” model, whereby the server
initiates the protocol exchange with either a Notify or Put operation. These Notify
or Put features are optionally supported by servers and clients. Clients may
register in order to receive such events/notifications. Registration is
implementation-specific and not described in the specification.
The protocol allows two modes of operation. Synchronous
(mandatory) operations are those in which a client sends a request and waits
for a response from the server. Polled Asynchronous operations (optional) are
those in which the client sends a request, the server responds with a “pending”
status, and the client polls the server for the completed response and
completion status. Server implementations may choose not to support the Polled
Asynchronous feature of the protocol.
2.8
Support for “Intelligent Clients” and “Key Using Devices“
The protocol supports intelligent clients, such as end-user
workstations, which are capable of requesting all of the functions of KMIP. It
also allows subsets of the protocol and possible alternate message
representations in order to support less-capable devices, which only need a
subset of the features of KMIP.
2.9 Batched
Requests and Responses
The protocol contains a mechanism for sending batched
requests and receiving the corresponding batched responses, to allow for higher
throughput on operations that deal with a large number of entities, e. g.,
requesting dozens or hundreds of keys from a server at one time, and performing
operations in a group. An option is provided to indicate whether to continue
processing requests after an earlier request in the batch fails or to stop
processing the remaining requests in the batch. Note that there is no option to
treat an entire batch as atomic, that is, if a request in the batch fails, then
preceding requests in the batch are not undone or rolled back (see Section 3.15 ). A special ID Placeholder (see Section 3.19 ) is provided in KMIP to allow
related requests in a batch to be pipelined.
The
reliable message delivery function is relegated to the transport protocol, and
is not part of the key management protocol itself.
For
requests that could result in large responses, a mechanism in the protocol
allows a client to specify in a request the maximum allowed size of a response.
The server indicates in a response to such a request that the response would
have been too large and, therefore, is not returned.
[KMIP-Spec] describes the key life-cycle model, based on
the NIST SP 800-57 key state definitions [SP800-57-1],
supported by the KMIP protocol. Particular implications of the key life-cycle
model in terms of defining time-related attributes of objects are discussed in Section
3.5 below.
This section provides guidance on using the functionality
described in the Key Management Interoperability Protocol Specification.
3.1 Authentication
As discussed in [KMIP-Spec], a
conforming KMIP implementation establishes and maintains channel
confidentiality and integrity, and proves server authenticity for KMIP
messaging. Client authentication is performed according to the chosen KMIP
authentication suite as specified in [KMIP-Prof].
Other mechanisms for client and server authentication are possible and optional
for KMIP implementations.
KMIP
implementations that use other vendor-specific mechanisms for authentication
may use the Credential attribute to include additional identification
information. Depending on the server’s configuration, the server may interpret
the identity of the requestor from the Credential object if it is not provided
during the channel level authentication. For example, in addition to performing
mutual authentication during SSL/TLS, the client passes the Credential object
(e.g. username and password) in the request. If the requestor’s username is not
specified inside the client certificate and is instead specified in the
Credential object, the server interprets the identity of the requestor from the
Credential object. This supports use cases where channel level authentication
authenticates a machine or service that is used by multiple users of the KMIP
server. If the client provides the username of the requestor in both the client
certificate and the Credential object, the server verifies that the usernames
are the same. If they differ, the authentication fails and the server returns
an error. If no Credential object is included in the request, the username of
the requestor is expected to be provided inside the certificate.
If authentication is unsuccessful, and it is possible to
return an “authentication not successful” error, this error should be returned
in preference to any other result status. This prevents status code probing by
a client that is not able to authenticate.
Server decisions regarding which operations to reject if
there is insufficiently strong authentication of the client are not specified
in the protocol. However, see Section 3.2 for operations for which
authentication and authorization are particularly important.
3.2
Authorization for Revoke, Recover, Destroy and Archive Operations
Neither authentication nor authorization is handled by the
KMIP protocol directly. In particular, the Credential attribute is not
guaranteed to be an authenticated identity of the requesting client. However,
the authentication suite, as specified in [KMIP-Prof],
describes how the client identity is established for KMIP-compliant
implementations. This authentication is performed for all KMIP operations, with
the single exception of the Query operation.
Certain operations that may be requested by a client via
KMIP, particularly Revoke, Recover, Destroy and Archive, may have a significant
impact on the availability of a key, on server performance and on key security.
When a server receives a request for one of these operations, it should ensure
that the client has authenticated its identity (see the Authentication Suites
section in [KMIP-Prof]). The server should also
ensure that the client requesting the operation is an object creator, security
officer or other identity authorized to issue the request. It may also require
additional authentication to ensure that the object owner or a security officer
has issued that request. Even with such authentication and authorization,
requests for these operations should be considered only a “hint” to the key
management system, which may or may not choose to act upon this request.
3.3 Using
Notify and Put Operations
The Notify and Put operations are the only operations in the
KMIP protocol that are initiated by the server, rather than the client. As
client-initiated requests are able to perform these functions (e.g., by polling
to request notification), these operations are optional for conforming KMIP
implementations. However, they provide a mechanism for optimized communication
between KMIP servers and clients and have, therefore, been included in [KMIP-Spec].
In using Notify and Put, the following constraints and
guidelines should be observed:
·
The client registers with the server, so that the server knows
how to locate the client to which a Notify or Put is being sent and which
events for the Notify are supported. However, such registration is outside the
scope of the KMIP protocol. Registration also includes a specification of
whether a given client supports Put and Notify, and what attributes may be
included in a Put for a particular client.
·
Communication between the client and the server is properly
authenticated to forestall man-in-the-middle attacks in which the client
receives Notify or Put operations from an unauthenticated server.
Authentication for a particular client/server implementation is at a minimum
accomplished using one of the mandatory authentication mechanisms (see [KMIP-Prof]). Further strengthening of the client/server
communications integrity by means of signed message content and/or wrapped keys
is recommended. Attribute values other than “Last Change Date” should not be
included in a Notify to minimize risk of exposure of attribute information.
·
In order to minimize possible divergence of key or state
information between client and server as a result of server-initiated
communication, any client receiving Notify or Put messages returns
acknowledgements of these messages to the server. This acknowledgement may be
at communication layers below the KMIP layer, such as by using transport-level
acknowledgement provided in TCP/IP.
·
For client devices that are incapable of responding to messages
from the server, communication with the server happens via a proxy entity that
communicates with the server, using KMIP, on behalf of the client. It is
possible to secure communication between a proxy entity and the client using
other, potentially proprietary mechanisms.
3.4 Usage
Allocation
Usage should be allocated and handled carefully at the
client, since power outages or other types of client failures (crashes) may
render allocated usage lost. For example, in the case of a key being used for the
encryption of tapes, such a loss of the usage allocation information following
a client failure during encryption may result in the necessity for the entire
tape backup session to be re-encrypted using a different key, if the server is
not able to allocate more usage. It is possible to address this through such
approaches as caching usage allocation information on stable storage at the
client, and/or having conservative allocation policies at the server (e.g., by
keeping the maximum possible usage allocation per client request moderate). In
general, usage allocations should be as small as possible; it is preferable to
use multiple smaller allocation requests rather than a single larger request to
minimize the likelihood of unused allocation.
3.5
Key State and Times
[KMIP-Spec] provides a number of
time-related attributes, including the following:
·
Initial Date: The date and time when the managed cryptographic object
was first created by or registered at the server
·
Activation Date: The date and time when the managed cryptographic
object may begin to be used for applying cryptographic protection to data
·
Process Start Date: The date and time when a managed symmetric key
object may begin to be used for processing cryptographically protected data
·
Protect Stop Date: The date and time when a managed symmetric key
object may no longer be used for applying cryptographic protection to data
·
Deactivation Date: The date and time when the managed cryptographic
object may no longer be used for any purpose, except for decryption, signature
verification, or unwrapping, but only under extraordinary circumstances and
when special permission is granted
·
Destroy Date: The date and time when the managed cryptographic object
was destroyed
·
Compromise Occurrence Date: The date and time when the managed cryptographic
object was first believed to be compromised
·
Compromise Date: The date and time when the managed cryptographic
object is entered into the compromised state
·
Archive Date: The date and time when the managed object was
placed in Off-Line storage
These attributes apply to all cryptographic objects (symmetric
keys, asymmetric keys, etc) with exceptions as noted in [KMIP-Spec].
However, certain of these attributes (such as the Initial Date) are not
specified by the client and are implicitly set by the server.
In using these attributes, the following guidelines should
be observed:
·
As discussed for each of these attributes in Section 3 of [KMIP-Spec], a number of these times are set once and it
is not possible for the client or server to modify them. However, several of
the time attributes (particularly the Activation Date, Protect Start Date,
Process Stop Date and Deactivation Date) may be set by the server and/or
requested by the client. Coordination of time-related attributes between client
and server, therefore, is primarily the responsibility of the server, as it
manages the cryptographic object and its state. However, special conditions
related to time-related attributes, governing when the server accepts client
modifications to time-related attributes, may be negotiated by policy exchange
between the client and server, outside the Key Management Interoperability
Protocol.
In general, state transitions occur as a result of operational requests, such
as Create, Create Key Pair, Register, Activate, Revoke, and Destroy. However,
clients may need to specify times in the future for such things as Activation Date,
Deactivation Date, Process Start Date, and Protect Stop Date.
KMIP allows clients to specify times in the past for such attributes as Activation
Date and Deactivation Date. This is intended primarily for clients that were
disconnected from the server at the time that the client performed that
operation on a given key.
·
It is valid to have a projected Deactivation Date when there is
no Activation Date. This means, however, that the key is not yet active, even
though its projected Deactivation Date has been specified. A valid Deactivation
Date is greater than or equal to the Activation Date.
·
The Protect Stop Date may be equal to, but may not be later than
the Deactivation Date. Similarly, the Process Start Date may be equal to, but
may not precede, the Activation Date. KMIP implementations should consider
specifying both these attributes, particularly for symmetric keys, as a key may
be needed for processing protected data (e.g., decryption) long after it is no
longer appropriate to use it for applying cryptographic protection to data
(e.g., encryption).
·
If a Destroy operation is performed, resulting in the Destroy Date
being set, and the object has not already been deactivated, the deactivation of
the object is also performed prior to the Destroy operation, so that Destroy Date
is greater than or equal to the Deactivation Date. If other time-related
attributes (e.g., Protect Stop Date) are set to a future date, the server
should set these to the deactivation date.
·
After a cryptographic object is destroyed, a key management
server may retain certain information about the object, such as the Unique
Identifier.
KMIP allows the specification of attributes on a per-client
basis, such that a server could maintain or present different sets of
attributes for different clients. This flexibility may be necessary in some
cases, such as when a server maintains the availability of a given key for some
clients, even after that same key is moved to an inactive state (e.g.
deactivated state) for other clients. However, such an approach might result in
significant inconsistencies regarding the object state from the point of view
of all participating clients and should, therefore, be avoided. A server should
maintain a consistent state for each object, across all clients that have or are
able to request that object.
3.6 Template
It is possible for a server to maintain different policy
templates for different clients. As in the state transitions described above,
however, this practice is discouraged.
When the Archive operation is performed, it is recommended
that an object identifier and a minimal set of attributes be retained within
the server for operational efficiency. In such a case, the retained attributes
may include Unique Identifier and State.
Any number of vendor-specific extensions may be included in
the Message Extension optional structure. This allows KMIP implementations to
create multiple extensions to the protocol.
3.9
Unique Identifiers
For clients that require unique identifiers in a special
form, out-of-band registration/configuration may be used to communicate this
requirement to the server.
3.10 Result Message
Text
KMIP specifies the Result Status, the Result Reason and the
Result Message as normative message contents. For the Result Status and Result Reason,
the enumerations provided in [KMIP-Spec] are the
normative values. The values for the Result Message text, on the other hand,
are implementation-specific. In consideration of internationalization, it is
recommended that any vendor implementation of KMIP provide appropriate language
support for the Return Message. How a client specifies the language for Result
Messages is outside the scope of the KMIP.
3.11
Query
Query does not explicitly support client requests to
determine what operations require authentication. To determine whether an
operation requires authentication, a client should request that operation.
3.12 Canceling
Asynchronous Operations
If an asynchronous operation is cancelled by the client, no
information is returned by the server in the result code regarding any
operations that may have been partially completed. Identification and
remediation of partially completed operations is the responsibility of the
server.
It is the responsibility of the server to determine when to
discard the status of asynchronous operations. The determination of how long a
server should retain the status of an asynchronous operation is
implementation-dependent and not defined by KMIP.
Once a client has received the status on an asynchronous
operation other than “pending”, any subsequent request for status of that
operation may return either the same status as in a previous polling request or
an “unavailable” response.
3.13
Multi-instance Hash
The Digest attribute contains the output of hashing a
managed object, such as a key or a certificate. The server always generates the
SHA-256 hash value when the object is created or generated. KMIP allows
multiple instances of the digest attribute to be associated with the same
managed object. For example, it is common practice for publicly trusted CAs to
publish two digests (often referred to as the fingerprint or the thumbprint) of
their certificate: one calculated using the SHA-1 algorithm and another using
the MD-5 algorithm. In this case, each digest would be calculated by the server
using a different hash algorithm.
3.14 Returning
Related Objects
The key block is intended to return a single object, with
associated attributes and other data. For those cases in which multiple related
objects are needed by a client, such as the private key and the related
certificate specified by RACF and JKS, the client should issue multiple Get
requests to obtain these related objects.
3.15 Reducing
Multiple Requests through the Use of Batch
KMIP supports batch operations in order to reduce the number
of calls between the client and server for related operations. For example,
Locate and Get are likely to be commonly accomplished within a single batch
request.
KMIP does not ensure that batch operations are atomic on the
server side. If servers implement such atomicity, the client is able to use the
optional “undo” mode to request roll-back for batch operations implemented as
atomic transactions. However, support for “undo” mode is optional in the
protocol, and there is no guarantee that a server that supports “undo” mode has
effectively implemented atomic batches. The use of “undo”, therefore, should be
restricted to those cases in which it is possible to assure the client, through
mechanisms outside of KMIP, of the server effectively supporting atomicity for
batch operations.
3.16 Maximum Message
Size
When a server is processing requests in a batch, it should
compare the cumulative response size of the message to be returned after each request
with the specified Maximum Response Size. If the message is too large, it
should prepare a maximum message size error response message at that point,
rather than continuing with operations in the batch. This increases the
client’s ability to understand what operations have and have not been completed.
When processing individual requests within the batch, the
server that has encountered a Maximum Response Size error should not return
attribute values or other information as part of the error response.
3.17 Using Offset in
Re-key and Re-certify Operations
Both the Re-key and the Re-certify operations allow the
specification of an offset interval.
The Re-key operation allows the client to specify an offset
interval for activation of the key. This offset specifies the duration of time
between the time the request is made and the time when the activation of the
key occurs. If an offset is specified, all other times for the new key are
determined from the new Activation Date, based on the intervals used by the previous
key, i.e., from the Activation Date to the Process Start Date, Protect Stop
Date, etc.
The Re-certify operation allows the client to specify an
offset interval that indicates the difference between the Initial Date of the
new certificate and the Activation Date of the new certificate. As with the Re-key
operation, all other times for the certificate are determined using the
intervals used for the previous certificate.
3.18 Locate Queries
It is possible to formulate Locate queries to address any of
the following conditions:
·
Exact match of a transition to a given state. Locate the key(s) with
a transition to a certain state at a specified time (t).
·
Range match of a transition to a given state. Locate the key(s) with
a transition to a certain state at any time at or between two specified times
(t and t’).
·
Exact match of a state at a specified time. Locate the key(s)
that are in a certain state at a specified time (t).
·
Match of a state during an entire time range. Locate the key(s)
that are in a certain state during an entire time specified with times (t and
t’). Note that the Activation Date could occur at or before t and that the
Deactivation Date could occur at or after t’+1.
·
Match of a state at some point during a time range. Locate the
key(s) that are in a certain state at some time at or between two specified
times (t and t’). In this case, the transition to that state could be before
the start of the specified time range.
This is accomplished by allowing any date/time attribute to
be present either once (for an exact match) or at most twice (for a range
match).
For instance, if the state we are interested in is Active,
the Locate queries would be the following (corresponding to the bulleted list
above):
·
Exact match of a transition to a given state: Locate
(ActivationDate(t)). Locate keys with an Activation Date of t.
·
Range match of a transition to a given state: Locate (ActivationDate(t),
ActivationDate(t')). Locate keys with an Activation Date at or between t and
t’.
·
Exact match of a state at a specified time: Locate
(ActivationDate(0), ActivationDate(t), DeactivationDate(t+1),
DeactivationDate(MAX_INT), CompromiseDate(t+1), CompromiseDate(MAX_INT) ).
Locate keys in the Active state at time t, by looking for keys with a
transition to Active before or until t, and a transition to Deactivated or
Compromised after t (because we don't want the keys that have a transition to Deactivated
or Compromised before t). The server assumes that keys without a
DeactivationDate or CompromiseDate is equivalent to MAX_INT (i.e., infinite).
·
Match of a state during an entire time range: Locate
(ActivationDate(0), ActivationDate(t), DeactivationDate(t'+1),
DeactivationDate(MAX_INT), CompromiseDate(t'+1), CompromiseDate(MAX_INT) ).
Locate keys in the Active state during the entire time from t to t’.
·
Match of a state at some point during a time range: Locate
(ActivationDate(0), ActivationDate(t'-1), DeactivationDate(t+1),
DeactivationDate(MAX_INT), CompromiseDate(t+1), CompromiseDate(MAX_INT)).
Locate keys in the Active state at some time from t to t’, by looking for keys
with a transition to Active between 0 and t’-1 and exit out of Active on or
after t+1.
The queries would be similar for Initial Date, Deactivation
Date, Compromise Date and Destroy Date.
In the case of the Destroyed-Compromise state, there are two
dates recorded: the Destroy Date and the Compromise Date. For this state, the
Locate operation would be expressed as follows:
Exact match of a transition to a given state: Locate
(CompromiseDate(t), State(Destroyed-Compromised)) and Locate (DestroyDate(t),
State(Destroyed-Compromised)). KMIP does not support the OR in the Locate
request, so two requests should be issued
·
Range match of a transition to a given state: Locate
(CompromiseDate(t), CompromiseDate(t'), State(Destroyed-Compromised)) and
Locate (DestroyDate(t), DestroyDate(t'), State(Destroyed-Compromised)). Locate
keys that are Destroyed-Compromised and were Compromised or Destroyed at or
between t and t’.
·
Exact match of a state at a specified time: Locate
(CompromiseDate(0), CompromiseDate(t), DestroyDate(0), DestroyDate(t)); nothing
else is needed, since there is no exit transition. Locate keys with a
Compromise Date at or before t, and with a Destroy Date at or before t. These
keys are, therefore, in the Destroyed-Compromised state at time t.
·
Match of a state during an entire time range: Locate
(CompromiseDate(0), CompromiseDate(t), DestroyDate(0), DestroyDate(t)). Same as
above. As there is no exit transition from the Destroyed-Compromised state, the
end of the range (t’) is irrelevant.
·
Match of a state at some point during a time range: Locate
(CompromiseDate(0), CompromiseDate(t'-1), DestroyDate(0), DestroyDate(t'-1)).
Locate keys with a Compromise Date at or before t’-1, and with a Destroy Date
at or before t’-1. As there is no exit transition from the
Destroyed-Compromised state, the start of the range (t) is irrelevant.
3.19 ID Placeholder
A number of operations are affected by a mechanism referred
to as the ID Placeholder. This is a temporary variable consisting of a single
Unique Identifier that is stored inside the server for the duration of
executing a batch of operations. The ID Placeholder is obtained from the Unique
Identifier returned by certain operations; the applicable operations are
identified in Table 1, along with a list of operations that accept the ID
Placeholder as input.
|
Operation
|
ID Placeholder at the
beginning of the operation
|
ID Placeholder upon
completion of the operation (in case of operation failure, a batch using the ID
Placeholder stops)
|
|
Create
|
-
|
ID of new Object
|
|
Create Key Pair
|
-
|
ID of new Private Key (ID of new
Public Key may be obtained via a Locate)
|
|
Register
|
-
|
ID of newly registered Object
|
|
Derive Key
|
- (multiple Unique Identifiers
may be specified in the request)
|
ID of new Symmetric Key
|
|
Locate
|
-
|
ID of located Object
|
|
Get
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Request Object
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Validate
|
-
|
-
|
|
Get Attributes List/Modify/Add/Delete
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Activate
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Revoke
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Destroy
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Archive/Recover
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Certify
|
ID of Public Key
|
ID of new Certificate
|
|
Re-certify
|
ID of Certificate
|
ID of new Certificate
|
|
Re-key
|
ID of Symmetric Key to be
rekeyed
|
ID of new Symmetric Key
|
|
Obtain Lease
|
ID of Object
|
no change
|
|
Get Usage Allocation
|
ID of Key
|
no
change
|
Table 1: ID Placeholder Prior to and Resulting from a KMIP Operation
3.20
Key Block
The protocol uses the Key Block structure to transport a key
to the client or server. This Key Block consists of the Key Value Type, the Key
Value, and the Key Wrapping Data. The Key Value Type identifies the format of
the Key Material, e.g., Raw format or Transparent Key structure. The Key Value
consists of the Key Material and optional attributes. The Key Wrapping Data provides
information about the wrapping key and the wrapping mechanism, and is returned
only if the client requests the Key Value to be wrapped by specifying the Key
Wrapping Specification inside the Get Request Payload. The Key Wrapping Data
may also be included inside the Key Block if the client registers a wrapped
key.
The protocol allows any attribute to be included inside the
Key Value and allows these attributes to be cryptographically bound to the Key
Material (i.e., by signing, MACing, encrypting, or both encrypting and
signing/MACing the Key Value). Some of the attributes that may be included
include the following:
·
Unique Identifier – uniquely identifies the key
·
Cryptographic Algorithm (e.g., AES, 3DES, RSA) – this attribute is
either specified inside the Key Block structure or the Key Value structure.
·
Cryptographic Length (e.g., 128, 256, 2048) – this attribute is either
specified inside the Key Block structure or the Key Value structure
·
Cryptographic Usage Mask– identifies the cryptographic usage of
the key (e.g., Encrypt, Wrap Key, Export)
·
Cryptographic Parameters – provides additional parameters for
determining how the key may be used
–
Block Cipher Mode (e.g., CBC, NISTKeyWrap, GCM) – this parameter
identifies the mode of operation, including block cipher-based MACs or wrapping
mechanisms
–
Padding Method (e.g., OAEP, X9.31, PSS) – identifies the padding method
and if applicable the signature or encryption scheme.
–
Hashing Algorithm (e.g., SHA-256) – identifies the hash algorithm to be
used with the signature/encryption mechanism or Mask Generation Function; note
that the different HMACs are defined individually as algorithms and do not
require the Hashing Algorithm parameter to be set
–
Role Type – Identifies the financial key role (e.g., DEK, KEK)
·
State (e.g., Active)
·
Dates (e.g., Activation Date, Process Start Date, Protect Stop
Date)
·
Custom Attribute – allows vendors and clients to define
vendor-specific attributes; may also be used to prevent replay attacks by
setting a nonce
KMIP provides the option to register and get keys in wrapped
format. Clients request the server to return a wrapped key by including the Key
Wrapping Specification in the Get Request Payload. Similarly, clients register
a wrapped key by including the Key Wrapping Data in the Register Request
Payload. The Wrapping Method identifies the type of mechanism used to wrap the
key, but does not identify the algorithm or block cipher mode. It is possible
to determine these from the attributes set for the specified Encryption Key or
MAC/Signing Key. If a key has multiple Cryptographic Parameters set, clients
may include the applicable parameters in Key Wrapping Specification. If
omitted, the server chooses the Cryptographic Parameter attribute with the
lowest index.
The Key Value includes both the Key Material and,
optionally, attributes of the key; these may be provided by the client in the Register
Request Payload; the server only includes attributes when requested in the Key
Wrapping Specification of the Get Request Payload. The Key Value may be
encrypted, signed/MACed, or both encrypted and signed/MACed (and vice versa).
In addition, clients have the option to request or import a wrapped Key Block
according to standards, such as ANSI TR-31, or vendor-specific key wrapping
methods.
It is important to note that if the Key Wrapping
Specification is included in the Get Request Payload, the Key Value may not
necessarily be encrypted. If the Wrapping Method is MAC/sign, the returned Key
Value is in plaintext, and the Key Wrapping Data includes the MAC or Signature
of the Key Value.
Prior to wrapping or unwrapping a key, the server should verify
that the wrapping key is allowed to be used for the specified purpose. For
example, if a symmetric key is used for key encryption in response to a Get
request, the symmetric key should have the “Wrap Key” bit set in its Cryptographic
Usage Mask. Similarly, if the client registers a signed key, the server should verify
that the Signature Key, as specified by the client inside the Key Wrapper Data,
has the “Verify” bit set in the Cryptographic Usage Mask. If the wrapping key
is not permitted to be used for the requested purpose (e.g., when the
Cryptographic Usage Mask is not set), the server should return the Operation
Failed error.
3.21.1 Encrypt-only Example with a Symmetric
Key as an Encryption Key for a Get Request and Response
The client sends a Get request to obtain a key that is
stored on the server. When the client sends a Get request to the server, a Key
Wrapping Specification may be included. If a Key Wrapping Specification is
included in the Get request, and a client wants the requested key and its
Cryptographic Usage Mask attribute to be wrapped using AES key wrap, the client
includes the following information in the Key Wrapping Specification:
·
Wrapping Method: Encrypt
·
Encryption Key Information
–
Unique Key ID: Key ID of the AES wrapping key
–
Cryptographic Parameters: The Block Cipher Mode is NISTKeyWrap (not necessary
if default block cipher mode for wrapping key is NISTKeyWrap)
·
Attribute Name: Cryptographic Usage Mask
The server uses the Unique Key ID specified by the client to
determine the attributes set for the proposed wrapping key. For example, the
algorithm of the wrapping key is not explicitly specified inside the Key
Wrapping Specification; the server determines the algorithm to be used for
wrapping the key by identifying the Algorithm attribute set for the specified
Encryption Key.
The Cryptographic Parameters attribute should be specified
by the client if multiple instances of the Cryptographic Parameters exist, and
the lowest index does not correspond to the NIST key wrap mode of operation. The
server should verify that the AES wrapping key has NISTKeyWrap set as an
allowable Block Cipher Mode, and that the “Wrap Key” bit is set in the Cryptographic
Usage Mask.
If the correct data was provided to the server, and no
conflicts exist, the server wraps the Key Value for the requested key using the
AES key wrap algorithm and wrapping key specified in the Encryption Key
Information; the Key Value contains both the Key Material and the Cryptographic
Usage Mask attribute, and return the encrypted result (byte string) as the Key
Value in the Key Block of the server’s response.
The Key Wrapping Data of the Key Block in the Get Response
Payload includes the same data as specified in the Key Wrapping Specification of
the Get Request Payload except for the Attribute Name.
The client sends a Register request to the server and
includes the wrapped key and the unique ID of the wrapping key inside the
Request Payload. The wrapped key is provided to the server inside the Key
Block. The Key Block includes the Key Value Type, the Key Value, and the Key
Wrapping Data. The Key Value Type identifies the format of the Key Material,
the Key Value consists of the Key Material and optional attributes that may be
included to cryptographically bind the attributes to the Key Material, and the
Key Wrapping Data identifies the wrapping mechanism and the encryption key used
to wrap the object and the wrapping mechanism.
Similar to the example in 3.21.1 the key is wrapped using
the AES key wrap. The Key Value includes four attributes: Cryptographic
Algorithm, Cryptographic Length, Cryptographic Parameters, and Cryptographic
Usage Mask.
The Key Wrapping Data includes the following information:
·
Wrapping Method: Encrypt
·
Encryption Key Information
–
Unique Key ID: Key ID of the AES wrapping key
–
Cryptographic Parameters: The Block Cipher Mode is NISTKeyWrap (not necessary
if default block cipher mode for wrapping key is NISTKeyWrap)
Attributes do not need to be specified in the Key Wrapping
Data. When registering a wrapped Key Value with attributes, clients may include
these attributes inside the Key Value without specifying them inside the
Template-Attribute.
Prior to unwrapping the key, the server determines the
wrapping algorithm from the Algorithm attribute set for the specified Unique ID
in the Encryption Key Information. The server verifies that the wrapping key may
be used for the specified purpose. In particular, if the client includes the Cryptographic
Parameters in the Encryption Key Information, the server verifies that the
specified Block Cipher Mode is set for the wrapping key. The server also verifies
that the wrapping key has the “Unwrap Key” bit set in the Cryptographic Usage
Mask.
The Register Response Payload includes the Unique ID of the
newly registered key and an optional list of attributes that were implicitly
set by the server.
The client sends a Get request to obtain a key (either
symmetric or asymmetric) that is stored on the server. When the client sends a
Get request to the server, a Key Wrapping Specification may be included. If a
Key Wrapping Specification is included, and the key is to be wrapped with an
RSA public key using the OAEP encryption scheme, the client includes the
following information in the Key Wrapping Specification. Note that for this
example, attributes for the requested key are not requested.
·
Wrapping Method: Encrypt
·
Encryption Key Information
–
Unique Key ID: Key ID of the RSA public key
–
Cryptographic Parameters:
Padding
Method: OAEP
Hashing
Algorithm: SHA-256
The Cryptographic Parameters attribute is specified by the
client if multiple instances of Cryptographic Parameters exist for the wrapping
key, and the lowest index does not correspond to the associated padding method.
The server should verify that the specified Cryptographic Parameters in the Key
Wrapping Specification and the “Wrap Key” bit in the Cryptographic Usage Mask
are set for the corresponding wrapping key.
The Key Wrapping Data returned by the server in the Key
Block of the Get Response Payload includes the same data as specified in the
Key Wrapping Specification of the Get Request Payload.
For both OAEP and PSS, KMIP currently assumes that the Hashing
Algorithm specified in the Cryptographic Parameters of the Get request is used
for both the Mask Generation Function (MGF) and hashing data. The example above
requires the server to use SHA-256 for both purposes.
The client sends a Get request to obtain a key that is
stored on the server. When the client sends a Get request to the server, a Key
Wrapping Specification may be included. If a key and Custom Attribute (i.e.,
x-Nonce) is to be MACed with HMAC SHA-256, the following Key Wrapping
Specification is specified:
·
Wrapping Method: MAC/sign
·
MAC/Signature Key Information
–
Unique Key ID: Key ID of the MACing key (note that the algorithm
associated with this key would be HMAC-256)
·
Attribute Name: x-Nonce
For HMAC, no Cryptographic Parameters need to be specified,
since the algorithm, including the hash function, may be determined from the
Algorithm attribute set for the specified MAC Key. The server should verify
that the HMAC key has the “MAC Generate” bit set in the Cryptographic Usage
Mask. Note that an HMAC key does not require the “Wrap Key” bit to be set in
the Cryptographic Usage Mask.
The server creates an HMAC value over the Key Value if the specified
MACing key may be used for the specified purpose and no conflicts exist. The
Key Value is returned in plaintext, and the Key Block includes the following
Key Wrapping Data:
·
Wrapping Method: MAC/sign
·
MAC/Signature Key Information
·
Unique Key ID: Key ID of the MACing key
·
MAC/Signature: HMAC result of the Key Value
In the example, the custom attribute x-Nonce was included to
help clients, who are relying on the proxy model, to detect replay attacks.
End-clients, who communicate with the key management server, may not support
SSL/TLS and may not be able to rely on the message protection mechanisms
provided by a security protocol. A custom attribute may be created to hold a
random number, counter, nonce, date, or time. The custom attribute needs to be
created before requesting the server to return a wrapped key and is recommended
to be set if clients frequently wrap/sign the same key with the same
wrapping/signing key.
Clients may want to register and store a wrapped key on the
server without the server being able to unwrap the key (i.e., the wrapping key
is not known to the server). Instead of storing the wrapped key as an opaque
object, clients have the option to store the wrapped key inside the Key Block
as an opaque cryptographic object, i.e., the wrapped key is registered as a
managed cryptographic object, but the encoding of the key is unknown to the
server. Registering an opaque cryptographic object allows clients to set all
the applicable attributes that apply to cryptographic objects (e.g.,
Cryptographic Algorithm and Cryptographic Length),
Opaque cryptographic objects are set by specifying the
following inside the Key Block structure:
·
Key Format Type: Opaque
·
Key Material: Wrapped key as a Byte String
The Key Wrapping
Data does not need to be specified.
3.22
Object Group
The key management system may specify rules for valid group
names which may be created by the client. Clients are informed of such rules by
a mechanism that is not specified by [KMIP-Spec]. In
the protocol, the group names themselves are character strings of no specified
format. Specific key management system implementations may choose to support
hierarchical naming schemes or other syntax restrictions on the names. Groups
may be used to associate objects for a variety of purposes. A set of keys used
for a common purpose, but for different time intervals, may be linked by a
common Object Group. Servers may create predefined groups and add objects to
them independently of client requests.
The key management system may contain multiple embedded CAs
or may have access to multiple external CAs. How the server routes a certificate
request to a CA is vendor-specific and outside the scope of KMIP. If the server
requires and supports the capability for clients to specify the CA to be used
for signing a Certificate Request, then this information may be provided by
including the Certificate Issuer attribute in the Certify or Re-certify
request.
[KMIP-Spec] supports multiple
options for submitting a certificate request to the key management server
within a Certify or Re-Certify operation. It is a vendor decision as to whether
the key management server offers certification authority (CA) functionality or
proxies the certificate request onto a separate CA for processing. The type of
certificate request formats supported is also a vendor decision, and this may,
in part, be based upon the request formats supported by any CA to which the
server proxies the certificate requests.
All certificate request formats for requesting X.509
certificates specified in [KMIP-Spec] (i.e.,
PKCS#10, PEM and CRMF) provide a means for allowing the CA to verify that the
client that created the certificate request possesses the private key
corresponding to the public key in the certificate request. This is referred to
as Proof-of-Possession (POP). However, it should be noted that in the case of
the CRMF format, some CAs may not support the CRMF POP option, but instead rely
upon the underlying certificate management protocols (i.e., CMP and CMC) to
provide POP. In the case where the CA does not support POP via the CRMF format
(including CA functionality within the key management server), an alternative
certificate request format (i.e., PKCS#10, PEM) would need to be used if POP
needs to be verified.
The Create Key Pair operation allows clients to specify attributes
using the Common Template-Attribute, Private Key Template-Attribute, and Public
Key Template-Attribute. The Common Template-Attribute object includes a list of
attributes that apply to both the public and private key. Attributes that are
not common to both keys may be specified using the Private Key
Template-Attribute or Public Key Template-Attribute. If a single-instance
attribute is specified in multiple Template-Attribute objects, the server obeys
the following order of precedence:
1. Attributes specified explicitly in the
Private and Public Key Template-Attribute, then
2. Attributes specified via templates in
the Private and Public Key Template-Attribute, then
3. Attributes specified explicitly in the
Common Template-Attribute, then
4. Attributes specified via templates in
the Common Template-Attribute
A client specifies several attributes in the Create Key Pair
Request Payload. The Common Template-Attribute includes the template name
RSACom and other explicitly specified common attributes:
Common Template-Attribute
·
RSACom Template
–
Cryptographic Algorithm: RSA
–
Cryptographic Length: 2048
–
Cryptographic Parameters: Padding Method OAEP
–
Custom Attribute: x-Serial 1234
–
Object Group: Key encryption group 1
·
Attribute
–
Cryptographic Length: 4096
–
Cryptographic Parameters: Padding Method PKCS1 v1.5
–
Custom Attribute: x-ID 56789
The Private Key Template-Attribute includes the template
name RSAPriv and other explicitly-specified private key attributes:
Private Key Template-Attribute
·
RSAPriv Template
–
Object Group: Key encryption group 2
·
Attribute
–
Cryptographic Usage Mask: Unwrap Key
–
Name: PrivateKey1
The Public Key Template Attribute includes explicitly-specified
public key attributes:
Public Key Template-Attribute
·
Attribute
–
Cryptographic Usage Mask: Wrap Key
–
Name: PublicKey1
Following the attribute precedence rule, the server creates a 4096-bit RSA key.
The following client-specified attributes are set:
Private Key
·
Cryptographic Algorithm: RSA
·
Cryptographic Length: 4096
·
Cryptographic Parameters: OAEP
·
Cryptographic Parameters: PKCS1 v1.5
·
Cryptographic Usage Mask: Unwrap Key
·
Custom Attribute: x-Serial 1234
·
Custom Attribute: x-ID 56789
·
Object Group: Key encryption group 1
·
Object Group: Key encryption group 2
·
Name: PrivateKey1
Public Key
·
Cryptographic Algorithm: RSA
·
Cryptographic Length: 4096
·
Cryptographic Parameters: OAEP
·
Cryptographic Parameters: PKCS1 v1.5
·
Cryptographic Usage Mask: Wrap Key
·
Custom Attribute: x-Serial 1234
·
Custom Attribute: x-ID 56789
·
Object Group: Key encryption group 1
·
Name: PublicKey1
During a Create Key Pair operation, a Link Attribute is
automatically created by the server for each object (i.e., a link is created
from the private key to the public key and vice versa). Certain attributes are
the same for both objects and are set by the server while creating the key
pair. The KMIP protocol does not support an equivalent operation for
registering a key pair. Clients are able to register the objects independently
and manually set the Link attributes to make the server aware that these keys
are associated with each other. When the Link attribute is set for both
objects, the server should verify that the registered objects indeed correspond
to each other and apply similar restrictions as if the key pair was created on
the server.
Clients should perform the following steps when registering
a key pair:
1. Register the public key and set all associated
attributes:
a.
Cryptographic
Algorithm
b.
Cryptographic
Length
c.
Cryptographic
Usage Mask
2. Register the private key and set all associated
attributes
a.
Cryptographic
Algorithm is the same for both public and private key
b.
Cryptographic
Length is the same for both public and private key
c.
Cryptographic Parameters
may be set; if set, the value is the same for both the public and private key
d.
Cryptographic
Usage Mask is set, but does not contain the same value for both the public and
private key
e.
Link is set with
Link Type Public Key Link and the Linked Object Identifier of the
corresponding Public Key
f.
Link is set for
the Public Key with Link Type Private Key Link and the Linked Object
Identifier of the corresponding Private Key
The KMIP protocol allows clients to register Secret Data
objects. Secret Data objects may include passwords or data that are used to
derive keys.
KMIP defines Secret Data as cryptographic objects. Even if
the object is not used for cryptographic purposes, clients still set certain
attributes, such as the Cryptographic Usage Mask, for this object unless
otherwise stated. Similarly, servers set certain attributes for this object,
including the Digest, State, and certain Date attributes, even if the attributes
seem relevant only for cryptographic objects.
When registering a Secret Data object, the following
attributes are set by the server:
·
Unique Identifier
·
Object Type
·
Digest
·
State
·
Initial Date
·
Last Change Date
When registering a Secret Data object for non-cryptographic
purposes, the following attributes are set by either the client or the server:
·
Cryptographic Usage Mask
The Cryptographic Usage Mask attribute is intended to
adequately support asymmetric concepts using symmetric keys. This is fairly
common practice in established crypto systems: the MAC is an example of an
operation where a single symmetric key is used at both ends, but policy
dictates that one end may only generate cryptographic tokens using this key (the
MAC) and the other end may only verify tokens. The security of the system fails
if the verifying end is able to use the key to perform generate operations.
In these cases it is not sufficient to describe the usage
policy on the keys in terms of cryptographic primitives like “encrypt” vs.
“decrypt” or “sign” vs. “verify”. There are two reasons why this is the case.
·
In some of these operations, such as MAC generate and verify, the
same cryptographic primitive is used in both of the complementary operations.
MAC generation involves computing and returning the MAC, while MAC verification
involves computing that same MAC and comparing it to a supplied value to
determine if they are the same. Thus, both generation and verification use the
“encrypt” operation, and the two usages are not able to be distinguished by
considering only “encrypt” vs. “decrypt”.
·
Some operations which require separate key types use the same
fundamental cryptographic primitives. For example, encryption of data,
encryption of a key, and computation of a MAC all use the fundamental operation
“encrypt”, but in many applications, securely differentiated keys are used for
these three operations. Simply looking for an attribute that permits “encrypt”
is not sufficient.
Allowing the use of these keys outside of their specialized purposes
may compromise security. Instead, specialized application-level permissions are
necessary to control the use of these keys. KMIP provides several pairs of such
permissions in the Cryptographic Usage Mask (3.14), such as:
|
MAC GENERATE
MAC VERIFY
|
For cryptographic MAC operations. Although it is possible
to compose certain MACs using a series of encrypt calls, the security of the
MAC relies on the operation being atomic and specific.
|
|
GENERATE CRYPTOGRAM
VALIDATE CRYPTOGRAM
|
For composite cryptogram operations such as financial CVC
or ARQC. To specify exactly which cryptogram the key is used for it is also
necessary to specify a role for the key (see Section 3.6
“Cryptographic Parameters” in [KMIP-Spec]).
|
|
TRANSLATE ENCRYPT
TRANSLATE DECRYPT
TRANSLATE WRAP
TRANSLATE UNWRAP
|
To accommodate secure routing of traffic and data. In
many areas that rely on symmetric techniques (notably, but not exclusively
financial networks), information is sent from place to place encrypted using
shared symmetric keys. When encryption keys are changed, it is desirable for
the change to be an atomic operation, otherwise distinct unwrap-wrap or
decrypt-encrypt steps risk leaking the plaintext data during the translation process.
TRANSLATE ENCRYPT/DECRYPT is used for data
encipherment.
TRANSLATE WRAP/UNWRAP
is used for key wrapping.
|
Table 2: Cryptographic Usage Masks Pairs
In order to support asymmetric concepts using symmetric keys
in a KMIP system, the server implementation needs to be able to differentiate
between clients for generate operations and clients for verify operations. As
indicated by Section 3 (“Attributes”) of [KMIP-Spec]
there is a single key object in the system to which all relevant clients refer,
but when a client requests that key, the server is able to choose which
attributes (permissions) to send with it, based on the identity and configured
access rights of that specific client. There is, thus, no need to maintain and
synchronize distinct copies of the symmetric key – just a need to define
access policy for each client or group of clients.
The internal implementation of this feature at the server
end is a matter of choice for the vendor: storing multiple key blocks with all
necessary combinations of attributes or generating key blocks dynamically are
both acceptable approaches.
The Application Specific Information attribute is used to
store data which is specific to the application(s) using the object. Some
examples of Application Name Space and Application Data pairs are given below.
·
SMIME, 'someuser@company.com'
·
SSL, 'some.domain.name'
·
Volume Identification, '123343434'
·
File Name, 'secret.doc'
·
Client Generated Key ID, ‘450994003'
The following Application Name Spaces are recommended:
·
SMIME
·
SSL
·
IPSEC
·
HTTPS
·
PGP
·
Volume Identification
·
File Name
·
LTO4
·
LIBRARY-LTO4
KMIP provides optional support for server-generated
Application Data. Clients may request the server to generate the Application
Data for the client by omitting Application Data while setting or modifying the
Application Specific Information attribute. A server only generates the
Application Data if the Application Data is completely omitted from the request,
and the client-specified Application Name Space is recognized and supported by
the server. An example for requesting the server to generate the Application
Data is shown below:
AddAttribute(UID,
AppSpecInfo{AppNameSpace=’LIBRARY-LTO4’});
If the server does not recognize the name space, the
“Application Name Space Not Supported” error is returned to the client.
If the Application Data is set to null, as shown in the
example below, and the Application Name Space is recognized by the server, the
server does not generate the Application Data for the client. The server stores
the Application Specific Information attribute with the Application Data value
set to null.
AddAttribute(UID,
AppSpecInfo{AppNameSpace=’LIBRARY-LTO4’, AppData=null});
KMIP does not support server mutation of client-supplied
attributes. If a server does not accept an attribute value that is being
specified inside the request by the client, the server returns an error and
specifies “Invalid Field” as Result Reason.
Attributes that are not set by the client, but are implicitly
set by the server as a result of the operation, may optionally be returned by
the server in the operation response inside the Template–Attribute.
If a client sets a time-related attribute to the current
date and time (as perceived by the client), but as a result of a clock skew,
the specified date of the attribute is earlier than the time perceived by the
server, the server’s policy will be used to determine whether to accept the “backdated
attribute”. KMIP does not require the server to fail a request if a backdated
attribute is set by the client.
If a server does not support backdated attributes, and
cryptographic objects are expected to change state at the specified current
date and time (as perceived by the client), clients are recommended to issue
the operation that would implicitly set the date for the client. For example,
instead of explicitly setting the Activation Date, clients could issue the
Activate operation. This would require the server to set the Activation Date to
the current date and time as perceived by the server.
If it is not possible to set a date attribute via an
operation, and the server does not support backdated attributes, clients need
to take into account that potential clock skew issues may cause the server to
return an error even if a date attribute is set to the client’s current date
and time.
For additional information, refer to the sections describing
the State attribute and the Time Stamp field in [KMIP-Spec].
This section describes methods for creating and storing key
identifiers that are interoperable across multi-vendor KMIP clients.
This method is primarily intended to promote interoperable
key naming between tape library products which already support non-KMIP key
managers, where KMIP support is being added.
When those existing library products become KMIP clients, a
common method for naming and storing keys may be used to support moving tape
cartridges between the libraries, and successfully retrieving keys, assuming that
the clients have appropriate access privileges. The library clients may be from
multiple vendors, and may be served by a KMIP key manager from a different
vendor.
3.30.1.1 Method Overview
·
The method uses the KMIP Application Specific Information (ASI)
attribute’s Application Data field to store the key name. The ASI Application
Name Space is used to identify the namespace (such as LIBRARY-LTO4).
·
The method also uses the tape format's Key Associated Data (KAD)
fields to store the key name. Tape formats may provide both authenticated and
unauthenticated storage for the KAD data. This method ensures optimum
utilization of the authenticated KAD data when the tape format supports
authentication.
·
The method supports both client-generated and server-generated
key names.
·
The method, in many cases, is backward-compatible if tapes are
returned to a non-KMIP key manager environment.
·
Key names stored in the KMIP server's ASI attribute are always
text format. Key names stored on the KMIP client's KAD fields are always
numeric format, due to space limitations of the tape format. The method
basically consists of implementing a specific algorithm for converting between
text and numeric formats.
·
The algorithm used by this conversion is reversible.
3.30.1.2 Definitions
·
Key Associated Data (KAD). Part of the tape format. May be
segmented into authenticated and unauthenticated fields. KAD usage is detailed
in the SCSI SSC-3 standard from the T10 organization.
·
Application Specific Information (ASI). A KMIP attribute.
·
Hexadecimal numeric characters. Case-sensitive, printable, single
byte ASCII characters representing the numbers 0 through 9 and uppercase alpha
A through F. (US-ASCII characters 30h-39h and 41h-46h).
Hexadecimal numeric characters are always paired, each pair representing a
single 8-bit numeric value. A leading zero character is provided, if necessary,
so that every byte in the tape’s KAD is represented by exactly 2 hexadecimal
numeric characters.
·
N(k). The number of bytes in the tape format's combined KAD
fields (both authenticated and unauthenticated).
·
N(a), N(u). The number of bytes in the tape format's
authenticated, and unauthenticated KAD fields, respectively.
3.30.1.3 Algorithm 1.
Numeric to text direction (tape format’s KAD to KMIP ASI)
Description: All information contained in the tape format’s
KAD fields is converted to a null-terminated ASCII string consisting of hexadecimal
numeric character pairs. First, the unauthenticated KAD data is converted to
text. Then, the authenticated KAD data is converted and appended to the end of
the string. The string is then null-terminated.
Implementation Example:
1. Define an input buffer sized for N(k).
For LTO4, N(k) is 44 bytes (12 bytes authenticated, 32 unauthenticated).
2. Define an output buffer sufficient to
contain a null-terminated string with a maximum length of 2*N(k)+1 bytes.
3. Define the standard POSIX (also known
as C) locale. Each character in the string is a single-byte US-ASCII character.
4. Copy the tape format’s KAD data, from
the unauthenticated KAD field first, to the input buffer. Effectively, the
first byte (byte 0) of the input buffer is the first byte of unauthenticated
KAD. Bytes from the authenticated KAD are concatenated, after the
unauthenticated bytes.
5. For each byte in the input buffer,
convert to US-ASCII as follows:
a.
Convert the byte's
value to exactly 2 hexadecimal numeric characters, including a leading 0 where necessary.
Append these 2 numeric characters to the output buffer, with the high-nibble
represented by the left-most hexadecimal numeric character.
b.
After all byte
values have been converted, null terminate the output buffer.
6. When storing the string to the KMIP
server, use the object’s ASI attribute’s Application Data field. Store the
namespace (such as LIBRARY-LTO4) in the ASI attribute’s Application Name Space
field.
3.30.1.4 Algorithm 2.
Text to numeric direction (KMIP ASI to tape format’s KAD)
Description: Hexadecimal numeric character pairs in the
null-terminated ASCII string are converted to single byte numeric values, and
stored in the tape format’s KAD fields. The authenticated KAD field is
populated first, from a sub-string consisting of the last 2*N(a) characters
in the full string. Any remaining characters in the string are converted and
stored to the unauthenticated KAD field. The null termination byte is not
converted.
Implementation Example:
1. Obtain the key’s name from the KMIP
server’s ASI attribute for that object. Copy the null terminated string to an input
buffer of size 2*N(k) + 1 bytes. For LTO4, an 89 character string, including
null termination, is sufficient for all possible key descriptors when names are
directly referenced.
2. Define output buffers for
unauthenticated KAD, and authenticated KAD, of size N(u) and N(a) respectively.
For LTO4, this would be 32 bytes of unauthenticated data, and 12 bytes of
authenticated data.
3. Define the standard POSIX (also known
as C) locale. Each character in the string is a single-byte US-ASCII character.
4. First, populate the authenticated KAD
buffer, converting a sub-string consisting of the last 2*N(a) characters
of the full string, not including the null termination byte.
5. When the authenticated KAD is filled,
next populate the unauthenticated KAD buffer, by converting the remaining
hexadecimal character pairs in the string.
3.30.1.5 Example Output
The following are examples illustrating some results of this
method. In the following examples, the sizes of the KAD for LTO4 are used. Different
tape formats may utilize different KAD sizes.
Example 1. Full combined KAD
This LTO4 tape’s combined KAD contains the following data
(represented in hexadecimal). For LTO4, the unauthenticated KAD contains 32
bytes, and the authenticated KAD contains 12 bytes.
Example 1a. Hexadecimal numeric
data from a tape’s KAD.
Shaded data is authenticated by the
tape drive.
02 04 17 11 39 43 42 36 30 41 33
34 39 31 44 33
41 41 43 36 32 42 07 F6 54 54 32
36 30 38 4C 34
30
30 30 39 30 35 32 38 30 34 31 32
The algorithm converts the numeric KAD data to the following
89 character null-terminated string for storage in the Application Data field
of a KMIP object's Application Specific Information attribute. The ASI
Application Name Space contains “LIBRARY-LTO4”.
Example 1b. Text string from KMIP
ASI Application Data.
Shaded characters are derived from
authenticated data. The null character is represented as <null>
0204171139434236304133343931443341414336324207F65454323630384C34303030393035323830343132<null>
Example 1c. The hexadecimal values
of the 89 US-ASCII characters in string 1b, from the KMIP ASI Application Data.
Note: these values are always in the range 30h-39h, or in the range 41h-46h, or
the 0h null.
30 32 30 34 31 37 31 31 33 39 34 33
34 32 33 36 33 30 34 31 33 33 33 34 33 39 33 31 34 34 33 33 34 31 34 31 34 33
33 36 33 32 34 32 30 37 46 36 35 34 35 34 33 32 33 36 33 30 33 38 34 43 33 34 33 30 33 30 33 30 33 39 33 30 33 35 33 32 33 38 33 30
33 34 33 31 33 32 00
For the reverse transformation, a client would retrieve the
string in 1b from the server, derive the numeric values shown in 1a, and store
them to the tape format's KAD data. First, the sub-string containing the
right-most 24 characters of the full 1b string are used to derive the 12-byte
authenticated KAD. The remaining characters are used to derive the 32-byte
unauthenticated KAD.
Example 2. Authenticated KAD only
This LTO4 tape’s KAD contains the following data
(represented in hexadecimal), all 12 bytes obtained from the authenticated KAD
field. There is no unauthenticated KAD data.
Example 2a. Hexadecimal numeric
data from a tape's KAD.
Shaded data is authenticated.
17
48 33 C6 20 42 10 A7 E8 05 F8 C7
The algorithm converts the numeric KAD data to the following
24 character null-terminated string, for storage in the Application Data field
of a KMIP object's Application Specific Information attribute.
Example 2b. Text string from KMIP
ASI Application Data.
Shaded characters are derived from
authenticated data. The null character is represented as <null>
174833C6204210A7E805F8C7<null>
For the reverse transformation, a client would derive the
numeric values in 2a, and store them to the tape format's KAD data. The
right-most 24 characters of the string in 2b are used to derive the 12 byte
authenticated KAD. In this example, there is no unauthenticated KAD data.
Example 3. Partially filled authenticated KAD
originating from a non-KMIP method
This LTO4 tape’s KAD contains the following data
(represented in hexadecimal). The unauthenticated KAD contains 10 bytes, and
the authenticated KAD contains 8 bytes.
Since the authenticated KAD was not filled, but the
unauthenticated data was populated, the method creating this key name is
potentially not backward-compatible with the KMIP key naming method. See
backward-compatibility assessment, below.
Example 3a. Hexadecimal numeric
data from a non-KMIP tape's KAD.
Shaded data is authenticated.
02 04 17 11 39 43 42 36 30 41 30 30 30 39 30 35
32
38
The algorithm converts the numeric KAD data to the following
36 character null-terminated string, for storage in the Application Data field
of a KMIP object's Application Specific Information attribute.
Example 3b. Text string from KMIP
ASI Application Data.
Shaded characters are derived from
authenticated data. The null character is represented as <null>
020417113943423630413030303930353238<null>
For the reverse transformation, a client would derive the
same numeric values shown in 3a, and store them to the tape's KAD. But their
storage locations within the KAD now differs (see 3c). The right-most 24
characters from the text string in 3b are used to derive the 12-byte
authenticated KAD. The remaining characters are used to fill the 32-byte
unauthenticated KAD.
Example 3c. Hexadecimal numeric
data from a tape's KAD.
Shaded data is authenticated.
02 04 17 11 39 43 42 36 30 41 30 30 30 39 30 35
32
38
3.30.1.6 Backward-compatibility
assessment
Where all the following conditions exist, a non-KMIP
solution may encounter compatibility issues during the Read and Appended Write
use cases.
1. The tape format supports authenticated
KAD, but the non-KMIP solution does not use, or only partially uses, the
authenticated KAD field.
2. The non-KMIP solution is sensitive to
data position within the combined KAD.
3. The media was written in a KMIP
environment, using this method, then moved to the non-KMIP environment.
The enumerations for the Revocation Reason attribute
specified in KMIP (see table 9.1.3.2.17 in [KMIP-Spec])
are aligned with the Reason Code specified in X.509 and referenced in RFC 5280
with the following exceptions. The certificateHold and removeFromCRL
reason codes have been excluded from [KMIP-Spec],
since this version of KMIP does not support certificate suspension (putting a
certificate hold) or unsuspension (removing a certificate from hold). The aaCompromise
reason code has been excluded from [KMIP-Spec] since
it only applies to attribute certificates, and, at this point of time,
attribute certificates are considered out-of-scope for [KMIP-Spec].
The priviledgeWithdrawn reason code is included in [KMIP-Spec]
since it may be used for either attribute or public key certificates. In the
context of its use within KMIP it is assumed to only apply to public key
certificates.
The process of generating a new certificate to replace an
existing certificate may be referred to by multiple terms, based upon what data
within the certificate is changed when the new certificate is created. In all
situations, the new certificate includes a new serial number and new validity
dates. [KMIP-Spec] uses the following terminology
which is aligned with the definitions found in IETF RFCs 3647 and 4949:
·
Certificate Renewal: The issuance of a new certificate to
the subject without changing the subject public key or other information (except
the serial number and certificate validity dates) in the certificate.
·
Certificate Update: The issuance of a new certificate,
due to changes in the information in the certificate other than the subject
public key.
·
Certificate Rekey: The generation of a new key pair for
the subject and the issuance of a new certificate that certifies the new public
key.
The current KMIP Specification supports certificate renewals
using the Re-Certify operation and certificate updates using the Certify
operation. Support for certificate rekey is not currently supported by KMIP,
since certificate rekey requires the ability to rekey an asymmetric key pair a
capability not currently supported by KMIP. Support for rekey of asymmetric key
pairs, along with certificate rekey, may be considered for a future KMIP
release.
Two parties receiving the same key as a Key BYTE STRING make
use of the key in exactly the same way in order to interoperate. To ensure
that, it is necessary to define a correspondence between the abstract syntax of
Key and the notation in the standard algorithm description that defines how the
key is used. The next sections establish that correspondence for the algorithms
AES [FIPS197] and Triple-DES [SP800-67].
[FIPS197] section 5.2, titled Key
Expansion, uses the input key as an array of bytes indexed starting at 0. The
first byte of the Key becomes the key byte in AES that is labeled index 0 in [FIPS197] and the other key bytes follow in index order.
Proper parsing and key load of the contents of the Key for
AES is determined by using the following Key byte string to generate and match
the key expansion test vectors in [FIPS197] Appendix
A for the 128-bit (16 byte) AES Cipher Key: 2B 7E 15 16 28 AE D2 A6 AB F7 15 88
09 CF 4F 3C.
A Triple-DES key consists of three keys for the
cryptographic engine (Key1, Key2, and Key3) that are each 64 bits (even though
only 56 are used); the three keys are also referred to as a key bundle (KEY) [SP800-67]. A key bundle may employ either two or three
mutually independent keys. When only two are employed (called two-key Triple-DES),
then Key1 = Key3.
Each key in a Triple-DES key bundle is expanded into a key
schedule according to a procedure defined in [SP800-67]
Appendix A. That procedure numbers the bits in the key from 1 to 64, with number
1 being the left-most, or most significant bit. The first byte of the Key is
bits 1 through 8 of Key1, with bit 1 being the most significant bit. The second
byte of the Key is bits 9 through 16 of Key1, and so forth, so that the last byte
of the KEY is bits 57 through 64 of Key3 (or Key2 for two-key Triple-DES).
Proper parsing and key load of the contents of Key for
Triple-DES is determined by using the following Key byte string to generate and
match the key expansion test vectors in [SP800-67] Appendix
B for the key bundle:
Key1 = 0123456789ABCDEF
Key2 = 23456789ABCDEF01
Key3 = 456789ABCDEF0123
4
Deferred KMIP Functionality
The KMIP Specification is currently missing items that have
been judged candidates for future inclusion in the specification. These items
currently include:
·
Registration of Clients. This would allow in-band registration
and management of clients, which currently may only be registered and/or
managed using off-line mechanisms.
·
Client-requested specification of additional clients that are
allowed to use a key. This requires coordinated identities between the client
and server, and as such, is deferred until registration of clients is
addressed.
·
Registration of Notifications. This would allow clients to
specify, using an in-band mechanism, information and events that they wish to
be notified of, and what mechanisms should be used for such notifications,
possibly including the configuration of pushed cryptographic material. This
functionality would assume the Registration of Clients as a prerequisite.
·
Key Migration. This would standardize the migration of keys from
one HSM to another, using mechanisms already in the protocol or ones added for
this purpose.
·
Server to Server key management. This would extend the protocol
to support communication between key management servers in different key
management domains, for purposes of exporting and importing cryptographic
material and potentially policy information.
·
Multiple derived keys. This would allow the creation of multiple
derived keys from one or more input keys. Note, however, that the current
version of KMIP provides the capability to derive multiple keys and
initialization vectors by creating a Secret Data object and specifying a
cryptographic length equal to the total length of the derived objects.
·
XML encoding. Expression of KMIP in XML rather than in tag/type/length/value
may be considered for the future.
·
Specification of Mask Generation Function. KMIP does not
currently allow clients to specify the Mask Generation Function and assumes
that encryption or signature schemes, such as OAEP or PSS, use MGF1 with the
hash function as specified in the Cryptographic Parameters attribute. Client
specification of MGFs may be considered for the future.
·
Certificate creation without client-provided Certificate Request.
This would allow clients to request the server to perform the Certify or
Re-certify operation from the specified key pair IDs without providing a
Certificate Request.
·
Server monitoring of client status. This would enable the
transfer of information about the client and its cryptographic module to the
server. This information would enable the server to generate alarms and/or
disallow requests from a client running component versions with known vulnerabilities.
·
Symmetric key pairs. Only a subset of the cryptographic
usage bits of the Cryptographic Usage Mask attribute may be permitted for keys
distributed to a particular client. KMIP does not currently address how to
securely assign and determine the applicable cryptographic usage for
a client.
·
Hardware-protected attribute. This attribute would allow clients
and servers to determine if a key may only be processed inside a secure
cryptographic device, such as an HSM. If this attribute is set, the key may only
exist in cleartext within a secure hardware device, and all security-relevant
attributes are bound to it in such a way that they may not be modified outside
of such a secure device.
·
Alternative profiles for key establishment. Less capable end-clients
may not be able to support TLS and should use a proxy to communicate with the
key management system. The KMIP protocol does not currently support alternative
profiles, nor does it allow end-clients relying on the proxy model to securely
establish a key with the server.
·
Attribute mutation. The possibility for the server to use
attribute values different than requested by the client if these values are not
suitable for the server, and return these values in the response, instead of
failing the request.
·
Cryptographic Domain Parameters. KMIP allows a limited number of
parameters to be specified during a Create Key Pair operation. Additional
parameters may be considered for the future.
·
Re-key support for other cryptographic objects. The Re-key
operation is currently restricted to symmetric keys. Applying Re-key to other
cryptographic objects, such as asymmetric keys and certificates, may be
considered for the future.
·
Certificate Suspension/Unsuspension. KMIP does not currently
support certificate suspension (putting a certificate on hold) or unsuspension
(removing a certificate from hold). Adding support for certificate
suspension/unsuspension into KMIP may be considered for the future.
·
Namespace registration. Establishing a registry for namespaces
may be considered for the future.
·
Registering extensions to KMIP enumerations. Establishing a
registry for extensions to defined KMIP enumerations, such as in support of
profiles specific to IEEE P1619.3 or other organizations, may be considered for
the future.
In addition to the functionality listed above, the KMIP TC
is interested in establishing a C&A (certification and accreditation)
process for independent validation of claims of KMIP conformance. Defining and
establishing this process is a candidate for work by the KMIP TC after V1.0.
This document is intended to be informational only and as
such has no conformance clauses. The conformance requirements for the KMIP specification
can be found in the "KMIP Specification" document itself, at the URL
noted on the cover page of this document.
The following abbreviations and acronyms are used in this
document:
3DES - Triple Data Encryption Standard specified in
ANSI X9.52
AES - Advanced Encryption Standard specified in
FIPS 197
ANSI - American National Standards Institute
ARQC - Authorization Request Cryptogram
ASCII - American Standard Code for Information
Interchange
CA - Certification Authority
CBC - Cipher Block Chaining specified in NIST SP
800-38A
CMC - Certificate Management Messages over CMS
specified in RFC 5275
CMP - Certificate Management Protocol specified in
RFC 4210
CRL - Certificate Revocation List specified in RFC
5280
CRMF - Certificate Request Message Format specified
in RFC 4211
CVC - Card Verification Code
DES - Data Encryption Standard specified in FIPS
46-3
DEK - Data Encryption Key
DH - Diffie-Hellman specified in ANSI X9.42
FIPS - Federal Information Processing Standard
GCM - Galois/Counter Mode specified in NIST SP
800-38D
HMAC - Keyed-Hash Message Authentication Code
specified in FIPS 198-1
HSM - Hardware Security Module
HTTP - Hyper Text Transfer Protocol
HTTP(S) - Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (Secure socket)
ID - Identification
IP - Internet Protocol
IPSec - Internet Protocol Security
JKS - Java Key Store
KEK - Key Encryption Key
KMIP - Key Management Interoperability Protocol
LTO4 - Linear Tape-Open 4
MAC - Message Authentication Code
MD5 - Message Digest 5 Algorithm specified in RFC
1321
MGF - Mask Generation Function
NIST - National Institute of Standards and
Technology
OAEP - Optimal Asymmetric Encryption Padding
specified in PKCS#1
PEM - Privacy Enhanced Mail specified in RFC 1421
PGP - Pretty Good Privacy specified in RFC 1991
PKCS - Public-Key Cryptography Standards
POP - Proof of Possession
POSIX - Portable Operating System Interface
PSS - Probabilistic Signature Scheme specified in
PKCS#1
RACF - Remote Access Control Facility
RSA - Rivest, Shamir, Adelman (an algorithm)
SHA - Secure Hash Algorithm specified in FIPS 180-2
SP - Special Publication
SSL - Secure Sockets Layer
S/MIME - Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions
TCP - Transport Control Protocol
TLS - Transport Layer Security
TTLV - Tag, Type, Length, Value
URI - Uniform Resource Identifier
X.509 - Public Key Certificate specified in RFC 5280
XML - Extensible Markup Language
The following individuals have participated in the
creation of this specification and are gratefully acknowledged:
Original Authors of the initial contribution:
David Babcock, HP
Steven Bade, IBM
Paolo Bezoari, NetApp
Mathias Björkqvist, IBM
Bruce Brinson, EMC
Christian Cachin, IBM
Tony Crossman, Thales/nCipher
Stan Feather, HP
Indra Fitzgerald, HP
Judy Furlong, EMC
Jon Geater, Thales/nCipher
Bob Griffin, EMC
Robert Haas, IBM
Timothy Hahn, IBM
Jack Harwood, EMC
Walt Hubis, LSI
Glen Jaquette, IBM
Jeff Kravitz, IBM
Michael McIntosh, IBM
Brian Metzger, HP
Anthony Nadalin, IBM
Elaine Palmer, IBM
Joe Pato, HP
René Pawlitzek, IBM
Subhash Sankuratripati, NetApp
Mark Schiller, HP
Martin Skagen, Brocade
Marcus Streets, Thales/nCipher
John Tattan, EMC
Karla Thomas, Brocade
Marko Vukolić , IBM
Steve Wierenga, HP
Participants:
Gordon
Arnold, IBM
Todd
Arnold, IBM
Matthew
Ball, Sun Microsystems
Elaine
Barker, NIST
Peter
Bartok, Venafi, Inc.
Mathias
Bjorkqvist, IBM
Kevin
Bocek, Thales e-Security
Kelley
Burgin, National Security Agency
Jon
Callas, PGP Corporation
Tom
Clifford, Symantec Corp.
Graydon
Dodson, Lexmark International Inc.
Chris
Dunn, SafeNet, Inc.
Paul
Earsy, SafeNet, Inc.
Stan
Feather, HP
Indra
Fitzgerald, HP
Alan
Frindell, SafeNet, Inc.
Judith
Furlong, EMC Corporation
Jonathan
Geater, Thales e-Security
Robert
Griffin, EMC Corporation
Robert
Haas, IBM
Thomas
Hardjono, M.I.T.
Marc
Hocking, BeCrypt Ltd.
Larry
Hofer, Emulex Corporation
Brandon
Hoff, Emulex Corporation
Walt
Hubis, LSI Corporation
Wyllys
Ingersoll, Sun Microsystems
Jay
Jacobs, Target Corporation
Glen
Jaquette, IBM
Scott
Kipp, Brocade Communications Systems, Inc.
David
Lawson, Emulex Corporation
Robert
Lockhart, Thales e-Security
Shyam
Mankala, EMC Corporation
Marc
Massar, Individual
Don
McAlister, Associate
Hyrum
Mills, Mitre Corporation
Landon
Noll, Cisco Systems, Inc.
René Pawlitzek, IBM
Rob
Philpott, EMC Corporation
Bruce
Rich, IBM
Scott
Rotondo, Sun Microsystems
Anil
Saldhana, Red Hat
Subhash
Sankuratripati, NetApp
Mark
Schiller, HP
Jitendra
Singh, Brocade Communications Systems, Inc.
Servesh
Singh, EMC Corporation
Sandy
Stewart, Sun Microsystems
Marcus
Streets, Thales e-Security
Brett
Thompson, SafeNet, Inc.
Benjamin
Tomhave, Individual
Sean
Turner, IECA, Inc.
Paul
Turner, Venafi, Inc.
Marko
Vukolic, IBM
Rod
Wideman, Quantum Corporation
Steven
Wierenga, HP
Peter
Yee, EMC Corporation
Krishna Yellepeddy, IBM
Peter
Zelechoski, Associate
|
Revision
|
Date
|
Editor
|
Changes Made
|
|
ed-0.98
|
2009-04-29
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Initial conversion of input document to OASIS format.
|
|
ed-0.98
|
2009-07-28
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Added clarifications, examples, and deferred items.
|
|
ed-0.98
|
2009-09-08
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Added approved proposals and incorporated Elaine Barker’s
comments.
|
|
ed-0.98
|
2009-09-23
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Removed KMIP Profiles section and incorporated the
Interoperable Key Naming for Tape proposal.
|
|
ed-0.98
|
2009-09-24
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Removed the Conformance section; added additional
Certificate Request and POP text to Certify and Re-certify; added the
Revocation Reason Codes section.
|
|
draft-01
|
2009-10-07
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Incorporated the Certificate Renewal, Update, Re-key proposal,
the Key Encoding proposal; removed normative words “must”, “shall”, “required”,
“will”, and “can”; added Create Key Pair example; updated the references and
acronyms list; incorporated comments from RobertH and SubhashS; updated the Authentication
section; added minor edits and clarifications.
|
|
draft-02
|
2009-10-09
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Incorporated Rod Wideman’s comments on the language. Changed
the heading indentation, paragraph style, and list styles according to the OASIS
template guidelines. Added additional references. Replaced the TBDs. Added a
use-case for registering a wrapped key as an opaque cryptographic object.
|
|
draft-03
|
2009-10-21
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Added the list of participants to Appendix B. Clarified
the Authentication section (section 3.1) and added examples. Modified the
title page. Performed minor editorial changes.
|
|
draft-04
|
2009-11-06
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Incorporated Elaine’s comments.
This is the tentative revision for public review.
|
|
draft-05
|
2009-11-09
|
Indra Fitzgerald
|
Minor edits to the reference sections.
|
