CBOR Profile of X.509 Certificates
draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-01
Network Working Group S. Raza
Internet-Draft J. Hoeglund
Intended status: Standards Track RISE AB
Expires: January 14, 2021 G. Selander
J. Mattsson
Ericsson AB
M. Furuhed
Nexus Group
July 13, 2020
CBOR Profile of X.509 Certificates
draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-01
Abstract
This document specifies a CBOR encoding/compression of RFC 7925
profiled certificates. By using the fact that the certificates are
profiled, the CBOR certificate compression algorithms can in many
cases compress RFC 7925 profiled certificates with over 50%. This
document also specifies COSE headers for CBOR encoded certificates as
well as the use of the CBOR certificate compression algorithm with
TLS Certificate Compression in TLS 1.3 and DTLS 1.3.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
Raza, et al. Expires January 14, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft CBOR Profile of X.509 Certificates July 2020
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. CBOR Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Deployment settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Expected Certificate Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Native CBOR Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.1. CBOR Certificate Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.2. CBOR Certificate Signature Algorithms Registry . . . . . 9
8.3. CBOR Certificate Public Key Algorithms Registry . . . . . 10
8.4. COSE Header Parameters Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.5. TLS Certificate Compression Algorithm IDs Registry . . . 11
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Example CBOR Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
A.1. Example X.509 Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
A.2. Example CBOR Certificate Compression . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.3. Example Native CBOR Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix B. X.509 Certificate Profile, ASN.1 . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1. Introduction
One of the challenges with deploying a Public Key Infrastructure
(PKI) for the Internet of Things (IoT) is the size and encoding of
X.509 public key certificates [RFC5280], since those are not
optimized for constrained environments [RFC7228]. More compact
certificate representations are desirable. Due to the current PKI
usage of X.509 certificates, keeping X.509 compatibility is necessary
at least for a transition period. However, the use of a more compact
encoding with the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
Show full document text