rfc9255v1.txt		rfc9255.txt
	Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Bush		Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Bush
	Request for Comments: 9255 Arrcus & Internet Initiative Japan		Request for Comments: 9255 Arrcus & IIJ
	Category: Standards Track R. Housley		Category: Standards Track R. Housley
	ISSN: 2070-1721 Vigil Security		ISSN: 2070-1721 Vigil Security
	June 2022		June 2022
	The 'I' in RPKI Does Not Stand for Identity		The 'I' in RPKI Does Not Stand for Identity
	Abstract		Abstract
	There is a false notion that Internet Number Resources (INRs) in the		There is a false notion that Internet Number Resources (INRs) in the
	RPKI can be associated with the real-world identity of the 'holder'		RPKI can be associated with the real-world identity of the 'holder'
	skipping to change at line 143 ¶		skipping to change at line 143 ¶
	document or transaction. Given such external, i.e. non-RPKI,		document or transaction. Given such external, i.e. non-RPKI,
	verification of authority, the use of RPKI-based credentials adds no		verification of authority, the use of RPKI-based credentials adds no
	authenticity.		authenticity.
	3. Discussion		3. Discussion
	Section 2.1 of the RPKI base document [RFC6480] says explicitly "An		Section 2.1 of the RPKI base document [RFC6480] says explicitly "An
	important property of this PKI is that certificates do not attest to		important property of this PKI is that certificates do not attest to
	the identity of the subject."		the identity of the subject."
	Section 3.1.2 of "Template for a Certification Practice Statement		Section 3.1 of "Template for a Certification Practice Statement (CPS)
	(CPS) for the Resource PKI (RPKI)" [RFC7382] makes very clear that		for the Resource PKI (RPKI)" [RFC7382] states that the Subject name
	"The Subject name in each certificate SHOULD NOT be 'meaningful'" and		in each certificate SHOULD NOT be meaningful and goes on to explain
	goes on to do so at some length.		this at some length.
	Normally, the INR holder does not hold the private key attesting to		Normally, the INR holder does not hold the private key attesting to
	their resources; the CA does. The INR holder has a real-world		their resources; the CA does. The INR holder has a real-world
	business relationship with the CA for which they have likely signed		business relationship with the CA for which they have likely signed
	real-world documents.		real-world documents.
	As the INR holder does not have the keying material, they rely on the		As the INR holder does not have the keying material, they rely on the
	CA, to which they presumably present credentials, to manipulate their		CA, to which they presumably present credentials, to manipulate their
	INRs. These credentials may be user ID and password (with two-factor		INRs. These credentials may be user ID and password (with two-factor
	authentication one hopes), a hardware token, client browser		authentication one hopes), a hardware token, client browser
	certificates, etc.		certificates, etc.
	Hence schemes such as [RPKI-RTA] and [RPKI-RSC] must go to great		Hence schemes such as Resource Tagged Attestations [RPKI-RTA] and
	lengths to extract the supposedly relevant keys from the CA.		Signed Checklists [RPKI-RSC] must go to great lengths to extract the
			supposedly relevant keys from the CA.
	For some particular INR, say, Bill's Bait and Sushi's Autonomous		For some particular INR, say, Bill's Bait and Sushi's Autonomous
	System (AS) number, someone out on the net probably has the		System (AS) number, someone out on the net probably has the
	credentials to the CA account in which BB&S's INRs are registered.		credentials to the CA account in which BB&S's INRs are registered.
	That could be the owner of BB&S, Roberto's Taco Stand, an IT vendor,		That could be the owner of BB&S, Roberto's Taco Stand (in San Diego),
	or the Government of Elbonia. One simply can not know.		an IT vendor, or the Government of Elbonia. One simply can not know.
	In large organizations, INR management is often compartmentalized		In large organizations, INR management is often compartmentalized
	with no authority over anything beyond dealing with INR registration.		with no authority over anything beyond dealing with INR registration.
	The INR manager for Bill's Bait and Sushi is unlikely to be		The INR manager for Bill's Bait and Sushi is unlikely to be
	authorized to conduct bank transactions for BB&S, or even to		authorized to conduct bank transactions for BB&S, or even to
	authorize access to BB&S's servers in some colocation facility.		authorize access to BB&S's servers in some colocation facility.
	Then there is the temporal issue. The holder of that AS may be BB&S		Then there is the temporal issue. The holder of that AS may be BB&S
	today when some document was signed, and could be the Government of		today when some document was signed, and could be the Government of
	Elbonia tomorrow. Or the resource could have been administratively		Elbonia tomorrow. Or the resource could have been administratively
	skipping to change at line 195 ¶		skipping to change at line 196 ¶
	Usually, before registering INRs, CAs require proof of an INR holding		Usually, before registering INRs, CAs require proof of an INR holding
	via external documentation and authorities. It is somewhat droll		via external documentation and authorities. It is somewhat droll
	that the CPS Template [RFC7382] does not mention any diligence the CA		that the CPS Template [RFC7382] does not mention any diligence the CA
	must, or even might, conduct to assure the INRs are in fact owned by		must, or even might, conduct to assure the INRs are in fact owned by
	a registrant.		a registrant.
	That someone can provide 'proof of possession' of the private key		That someone can provide 'proof of possession' of the private key
	signing over a particular INR should not be taken to imply that they		signing over a particular INR should not be taken to imply that they
	are a valid legal representative of the organization in possession of		are a valid legal representative of the organization in possession of
	that INR. They could be just an INR administrative person.		that INR. They could be in an INR administrative role, and not be a
			formal representative of the organization.
	Autonomous System Numbers do not identify real-world entities. They		Autonomous System Numbers do not identify real-world entities. They
	are identifiers some network operators 'own' and are only used for		are identifiers some network operators 'own' and are only used for
	loop detection in routing. They have no inherent semantics other		loop detection in routing. They have no inherent semantics other
	than uniqueness.		than uniqueness.
	4. Security Considerations		4. Security Considerations
	Attempts to use RPKI data to authenticate real-world documents or		Attempts to use RPKI data to authenticate real-world documents or
	other artifacts requiring identity, while possibly cryptographically		other artifacts requiring identity, while possibly cryptographically
End of changes. 5 change blocks.
	10 lines changed or deleted		12 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/