7 INTERNET-DRAFT M. Litvin, R. Shamir, T. Zegman
8 Expires February, 2001 Check Point Software
9 Category: Informational August, 2000
11 A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE
12 <draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-hybrid-auth-05.txt>
16 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
17 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
19 This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet Drafts are working
20 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
21 and its working Groups. Note that other groups may also distribute
22 working documents as Internet Drafts.
24 Internet-Drafts draft documents are valid for a maximum of six months
25 and may be updated, replaced, or made obsolete by other documents at
26 any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
27 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
29 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
30 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
32 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
33 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
36 To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
37 "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
38 Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe),
39 munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ftp.ietf.org (US East Coast), or
40 ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).
44 This document describes a set of new authentication methods to be
45 used within Phase 1 of the Internet Key Exchange (IKE). The proposed
46 methods assume an asymmetry between the authenticating entities. One
47 entity, typically an Edge Device (e.g. firewall), authenticates using
48 standard public key techniques (in signature mode), while the other
49 entity, typically a remote User, authenticates using challenge
50 response techniques. These authentication methods are used to
51 establish, at the end of Phase 1, an IKE SA which is unidirectionally
52 authenticated. To make this IKE bi-directionally authenticated, this
53 Phase 1 is immediately followed by an X-Auth Exchange [XAUTH]. The
54 X-Auth Exchange is used to authenticate the remote User. The use of
58 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 1]
60 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
63 these authentication methods is referred to as Hybrid Authentication
66 This proposal is designed to provide a solution for environments
67 where a legacy authentication system exists, yet a full public key
68 infrastructure is not deployed.
70 1.1 Reader Prerequisites
72 It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the terms and concepts
73 described in "Extended Authentication Within ISAKMP/Oakley" [XAUTH]
74 and "The ISAKMP Configuration Method" [IKECFG].
76 1.2 Changes from previous version
80 The document has undergone minor modification to prepare for for
81 independent submission as an Informational RFC.
83 Authentication method numbers are yet to be assigned by IANA.
87 Authentication method numbers were assigned by IANA without altering
92 Draft was renamed and reposted under the IPSRA working group.
96 The authentication methods numbers are now taken from the private use
99 Mutual authentication within Phase 1 is now discussed in [XAUTH].
101 Added clarification on the use of DSS signatures.
103 Added clarification on the content of ID payloads sent by the Client
106 Changed the semantics of the authentication methods so that they will
107 correspond to similar authentication methods defined in [XAUTH].
114 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 2]
116 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
121 The draft was extensively modified since the last version. The most
122 important change is the breaking down of authentication into two
123 stages. The first stage is used to authenticate the Edge Device and
124 is based on Phase 1 Exchange, while the latter authenticates the
125 Client and is based on a Transaction Exchange [IKECFG] with the
126 mechanism described in [XAUTH].
132 Several authentication methods are currently defined within IKE
133 [IKE]. These methods use either a secret which is shared by the
134 authenticating entities ("pre-shared key" method), or public key
135 cryptography ("digital signature" mode, "public key encryption" mode,
136 "revised public key encryption mode"). Legacy authentication systems,
137 such as Security Dynamics' SecurID and Axent's OmniGuard/Defender,
138 are not addressed in the current standard.
140 Legacy authentication systems are already deployed in many
141 organizations. These organizations may not wish to deploy a public-
142 key infrastructure in the near future. Furthermore, even if an
143 organization decides to deploy a public key infrastructure, the
144 deployment can take a considerable amount of time. Within the
145 transition period, organizations may wish to continue using their
146 legacy authentication systems.
148 2.2 Design considerations
150 The currently defined IKE authentication methods share two
151 properties: the authentication is mutual (both participants
152 authenticate each other); and symmetric (both participants use the
153 same method for authentication). Mutual authentication is important
154 not only for mere identification but also to prevent man in the
157 In client-server like implementations of IKE, where one of the
158 participants in the IKE is a User, while the other is an Edge Device
159 (e.g. firewall), it is not always possible to preserve symmetric
160 authentication. For example, a User can use an OmniGuard/Defender
161 token to answer an authentication challenge, but cannot issue an
162 OmniGuard/Defender authentication challenge to the firewall, since
163 she cannot check the firewall's response.
165 When designing an IKE authentication method that addresses legacy
166 authentication systems, it is necessary to preserve the mutual
170 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 3]
172 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
175 authentication property of IKE, while its symmetric nature may be
178 The authentication methods currently defined in IKE all use a six
179 packet exchange for Main Mode, and a three packet exchange for
180 Aggressive Mode. When defining a new authentication method, which is
181 based on challenge-response authentication, it is not possible to
182 place a limitation on the number of packets that need to be exchanged
183 to authenticate a User. Usually, a simple authentication protocol
184 consists of three messages: a challenge by the Edge Device; a
185 response by the User; and a status message (authentication
186 success/failure) sent by the Edge Device. However, in many cases the
187 protocol consists of more than a single challenge-response (e.g. new
188 PIN mode of SecurID).
190 Due to these limitation, we divide the authentication process into
191 two stages. In the first stage, Phase 1 Exchange is being utilized to
192 authenticate the Edge Device and to establish an IKE SA. In the
193 second stage, a Transaction Exchange [IKECFG] with the mechanism
194 described in [XAUTH] is used to authenticate the Client. Even though
195 the two stages could have been integrated into a single exchange, we
196 feel that this separation, being based on existing exchanges without
197 modifying them, is easier to implement.
199 This proposal is suitable for environments where a legacy
200 authentication system is deployed, yet public key cryptography can be
201 used by the Edge Devices. In that case, the situation resembles the
202 way authentication is implemented in the World Wide Web using SSL.
203 The servers use public-key techniques to authenticate themselves to
204 the Users, and establish an encrypted connection. The User can then
205 authenticate herself (or send other identification information, such
206 as a credit card number). The assumption in this mode is that
207 deploying public key for a small number of entities (web servers or
208 Edge Devices) is possible without a full-public key infrastructure
211 In some scenarios, security policy on the Edge Device might call for
212 authentication of both the User and the User's Device. In such a case
213 the Phase 1 authentication methods described in [XAUTH] should be
216 2.3 The hybrid authentication mode in a nut-shell
218 The participants in the hybrid authentication mode are typically a
219 User and an Edge Device. The participants start to negotiate, using
220 either Main Mode or Aggressive Mode, an SA in which the
221 authentication method is of a new type, indicating it is a hybrid
222 authentication method. At the end of Phase 1 the established IKE SA
226 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 4]
228 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
231 is used by the Edge Device to start a Transaction Exchange [CFG] in
232 order to authenticate the User. Upon the successful completion of the
233 exchange the participants can proceed to use the IKE SA for other
234 purposes (e.g. Quick Mode).
236 3. Terms and Definitions
238 3.1 Requirements Terminology
240 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
241 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
242 document are to be interpreted as described in [Bra97].
246 The following terms are used in this document:
248 Edge Device - Gateway, router or firewall protecting a corporate
251 User - A person trying to gain access to a corporate network
252 protected by an Edge Device.
254 User's Device - user's device.
256 Client - Denotes both the User and the User's Device. Used whenever a
257 distinction between the two terms is not necessary.
259 3.2.1 Authentication Methods Types
261 The following values relate to hybrid mode authentication. Their use
262 is detailed in following sections. These values are pending
266 ------------------------------ ----------------
275 This document follows the notations defined in [IKE].
277 4. Description of the Hybrid Authentication Mode
282 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 5]
284 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
287 The hybrid authentication mode is divided into two stages. The first
288 stage is a Phase 1 Exchange used to authenticate the Edge Device. The
289 exchange follows the same structure and rules as described in [IKE]
290 with some exceptions as described in the following sub-sections. The
291 Phase 1 Exchange can use either Aggressive Mode or Main Mode. The
292 initiator of the Phase 1 Exchange can be either the Client or the
293 Edge Device. The initiator of the following Transaction Exchange MUST
296 The Phase 1 Exchange MUST be immediately followed by a Transaction
297 Exchange whose initiator is the Edge Device. The Transaction Exchange
298 MUST be protected by the IKE SA negotiated in the preceding Phase 1
299 Exchange. This IKE SA MUST NOT be used for any other exchange before
300 the Transaction Exchange terminates successfully and the User is
301 authenticated. If the User fails to authenticate the IKE SA MUST be
304 There are two characteristics that uniquely identify a hybrid
305 authentication method:
307 The first is the direction of the authentication. The latter
308 determines the authentication method used to authenticate the Edge
309 Device (i.e. RSA or DSA).
311 For example, HybridInitRSA denotes Hybrid authentication that
312 utilizes RSA signatures in Phase 1 to authenticate the Edge Device.
313 The initiator of the Phase1 exchange is to be authenticated using
319 4.1 Bidirectional Authentication
321 For a discussion on how to use Bidirectional authentication together
322 with legacy authentication systems see [XAUTH].
324 4.2 Unidirectional Authentication
326 If the Client's side is not to be authenticated during the Phase 1
327 Exchange, the Phase 1 Exchange is slightly modified in the following
330 The signature payload sent by the Client SIG_I (or SIG_R) is replaced
331 with HASH_I (HASH_R), where HASH_I (HASH_R) contains the hash of the
332 data that would have otherwise be signed in SIG_I (SIG_R). Note
333 however that even if the Edge Device uses a signature scheme tied to
334 a particular hash algorithm (i.e. DSS with SHA), the negotiated prf
338 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 6]
340 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
343 or the HMAC version of the negotiated hash function MUST be used by
344 the Client when computing HASH_I (HASH_R).
346 If a certificate request payload is sent from the Edge Device the
347 Client MUST respond with an empty certificate payload, i.e. with a
348 certificate payload whose Certificate Data field has zero length.
350 The ID payload sent by the Client SHOULD be left empty (i.e. with an
351 empty Identification Data field and with an ID type of zero) thus
352 providing identity protection for the Client even if Aggressive Mode
357 Main Mode with hybrid authentication, Client initiator:
359 ---------- -----------
368 HDR*, IDii, HASH_I -->
370 <-- HDR*, IDir, [ CERT, ]
375 Aggressive Mode hybrid authentication, Edge Device initiator:
378 ----------- -----------
379 HDR, SA, KE, Ni, IDii -->
381 <-- HDR, SA, KE, Nr, IDir,
384 HDR, [ CERT, ] SIG_I -->
388 5. Implementation hints
390 Since the Edge Device always initiates the Transaction Exchange, when
394 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 7]
396 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
399 a Client initiates the Phase 1 Exchange, the authentication methods
400 included in the Client's proposal should be either HybridInitRSA or
401 HybridInitDSS, whereas if the Edge Device is the initiator of the
402 Phase 1 Exchange the authentication methods included in the Edge
403 Device's proposal should be either HybridRespRSA or HybridRespDSS.
405 6. Security Considerations
407 This document describes a protocol to be used to establish an IKE SA.
408 The level of security the protocol provides, relies among other
409 things, on the strength of the authentication mechanism used to
410 authenticate the Client.
412 While pre-shared key authentication for mobile users can be done only
413 in Aggressive Mode, thus revealing the identity of the User, these
414 proposed methods provide, when used in conjunction with Aggressive
415 Mode, User's identity protection and when used in conjunction with
416 Main Mode, provide identity protection for both parties.
418 While the authors greatly discourage the use of fixed passwords,
419 these methods have another advantage over the pre-shared key method:
420 The password is not prone to offline dictionary attacks, since the
421 password is encrypted using a derivative of the Diffie-Hellman shared
422 key. Only the participants in the IKE protocol know the shared key.
424 NB: When using standard IKE authentication methods both parties can
425 (and must) detect man-in-the-middle attacks. When one uses hybrid
426 authentication to establish unidirectional authenticated IKE SA's,
427 only the Client can (and must) detect these kinds of attacks.
429 This proposal does not provide protection against denial of service
430 attacks in which an attacker, impersonating a User, repeatedly tries
431 to authenticate, eventually causing the User's account to be revoked.
432 Nonetheless, this kind of weakness is inherent to challenge-response
433 techniques and should not be considered a weakness of this protocol
434 but of the authentication methods it utilizes.
438 The authors would like to thank Roy Pereira, Tim Jenkins, Paul
439 Kierstead and Stephen Kent for their comments and contributions to
450 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 8]
452 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
457 [Bra97] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
458 Requirement Levels", RFC2119
460 [IKE] D. Harkins, D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange (IKE)",
463 [ISAKMP] Maughhan, D., Schertler, M., Schneider, M., and Turner,
464 J., "Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol
467 [IKECFG] R. Pereira, S. Anand, B. Patel, "The ISAKMP Configuration
468 Method", draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-mode-cfg-05.txt, work in progress.
470 [XAUTH] R. Pereira, S. Beaulieu, "Extended Authentication Within
471 ISAKMP/Oakley", draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-xauth-06.txt, work in
477 Moshe Litvin <moshe@checkpoint.com>
484 Roy Shamir <roy@checkpoint.com>
491 Tamir Zegman <zegman@checkpoint.com>
498 Full Copyright Statement:
500 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.
502 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
506 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 9]
508 INTERNET DRAFT A Hybrid Authentication Mode for IKE August, 2000
511 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
512 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
513 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
514 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
515 are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
516 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
517 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
518 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
519 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
520 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
521 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
524 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
525 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
527 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
528 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
529 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
530 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
531 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
532 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
562 Litvin, Shamir, Zegman [Page 10]