Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          M. JonesRequest for Comments: 7797                                     MicrosoftUpdates:7519                                              February 2016Category: Standards TrackISSN: 2070-1721JSON Web Signature (JWS) Unencoded Payload OptionAbstract   JSON Web Signature (JWS) represents the payload of a JWS as a   base64url-encoded value and uses this value in the JWS Signature   computation.  While this enables arbitrary payloads to be integrity   protected, some have described use cases in which the base64url   encoding is unnecessary and/or an impediment to adoption, especially   when the payload is large and/or detached.  This specification   defines a means of accommodating these use cases by defining an   option to change the JWS Signing Input computation to not base64url-   encode the payload.  This option is intended to broaden the set of   use cases for which the use of JWS is a good fit.   This specification updatesRFC 7519 by stating that JSON Web Tokens   (JWTs) MUST NOT use the unencoded payload option defined by this   specification.Status of This Memo   This is an Internet Standards Track document.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   Internet Standards is available inSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7797.Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 2016Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (http://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 Contents1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31.1.  Notational Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.  The "b64" Header Parameter  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54.1.  Example with Header Parameters {"alg":"HS256"}  . . . . .6     4.2.  Example with Header Parameters           {"alg":"HS256","b64":false,"crit":["b64"]}  . . . . . . .75.  Unencoded Payload Content Restrictions  . . . . . . . . . . .75.1.  Unencoded Detached Payload  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85.2.  Unencoded JWS Compact Serialization Payload . . . . . . .85.3.  Unencoded JWS JSON Serialization Payload  . . . . . . . .86.  Using "crit" with "b64" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97.  Intended Use by Applications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10     9.1.  JSON Web Signature and Encryption Header Parameter           Registration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109.1.1.  Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1010. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1010.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1010.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 20161.  Introduction   The "JSON Web Signature (JWS)" [JWS] specification defines the JWS   Signing Input as the input to the digital signature or Message   Authentication Code (MAC) computation, with the value   ASCII(BASE64URL(UTF8(JWS Protected Header)) || '.' || BASE64URL(JWS   Payload)).  While this works well in practice for many use cases,   including those accommodating arbitrary payload values, other use   cases have been described in which base64url-encoding the payload is   unnecessary and/or an impediment to adoption, particularly when the   payload is large and/or detached.   This specification introduces a new JWS Header Parameter value that   generalizes the JWS Signing Input computation in a manner that makes   base64url-encoding the payload selectable and optional.  The primary   set of use cases where this enhancement may be helpful are those in   which the payload may be very large and where means are already in   place to enable the payload to be communicated between the parties   without modifications.Appendix F of [JWS] describes how to   represent JWSs with detached content, which would typically be used   for these use cases.   The advantages of not having to base64url-encode a large payload are   that allocation of the additional storage to hold the base64url-   encoded form is avoided and the base64url-encoding computation never   has to be performed.  In summary, this option can help avoid   unnecessary copying and transformations of the potentially large   payload, resulting in sometimes significant space and time   improvements for deployments.1.1.  Notational Conventions   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in   "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels" [RFC2119].   The interpretation should only be applied when the terms appear in   all capital letters.   BASE64URL(OCTETS) denotes the base64url encoding of OCTETS, per   Section 2 of [JWS].   UTF8(STRING) denotes the octets of the UTF-8 [RFC3629] representation   of STRING, where STRING is a sequence of zero or more Unicode   [UNICODE] characters.Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 2016   ASCII(STRING) denotes the octets of the ASCII [RFC20] representation   of STRING, where STRING is a sequence of zero or more ASCII   characters.   The concatenation of two values A and B is denoted as A || B.2.  Terminology   This specification uses the same terminology as the "JSON Web   Signature" [JWS] and "JSON Web Algorithms" [JWA] specifications.3.  The "b64" Header Parameter   This Header Parameter modifies the JWS Payload representation and the   JWS Signing Input computation in the following way:   b64      The "b64" (base64url-encode payload) Header Parameter determines      whether the payload is represented in the JWS and the JWS Signing      Input as ASCII(BASE64URL(JWS Payload)) or as the JWS Payload value      itself with no encoding performed.  When the "b64" value is      "false", the payload is represented simply as the JWS Payload      value; otherwise, it is represented as ASCII(BASE64URL(JWS      Payload)).  The "b64" value is a JSON boolean, with a default      value of "true".  When used, this Header Parameter MUST be      integrity protected; therefore, it MUST occur only within the JWS      Protected Header.  Use of this Header Parameter is OPTIONAL.  If      the JWS has multiple signatures and/or MACs, the "b64" Header      Parameter value MUST be the same for all of them.  Note that      unless the payload is detached, many payload values would cause      errors parsing the resulting JWSs, as described inSection 5.   The following table shows the JWS Signing Input computation,   depending upon the value of this parameter:   +-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+   | "b64" | JWS Signing Input Formula                                 |   +-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+   | true  | ASCII(BASE64URL(UTF8(JWS Protected Header)) || '.' ||     |   |       | BASE64URL(JWS Payload))                                   |   |       |                                                           |   | false | ASCII(BASE64URL(UTF8(JWS Protected Header)) || '.') ||    |   |       | JWS Payload                                               |   +-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 20164.  Examples   This section gives examples of JWSs showing the difference that using   the "b64" Header Parameter makes.  The examples all use the JWS   Payload value [36, 46, 48, 50].  This octet sequence represents the   ASCII characters "$.02"; its base64url-encoded representation is   "JC4wMg".   The following table shows a set of Header Parameter values without   using a false "b64" Header Parameter value and a set using it, with   the resulting JWS Signing Input values represented as ASCII   characters:   +-----------------------------+-------------------------------------+   | JWS Protected Header        | JWS Signing Input Value             |   +-----------------------------+-------------------------------------+   | {"alg":"HS256"}             | eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.JC4wMg         |   |                             |                                     |   | {"alg":"HS256","b64":false, | eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsImI2NCI6ZmFsc2U |   | "crit":["b64"]}             | sImNyaXQiOlsiYjY0Il19.$.02          |   +-----------------------------+-------------------------------------+   These examples use the Hash-based Message Authentication Code (HMAC)   key fromAppendix A.1 of [JWS], which is represented below as a JSON   Web Key [JWK] (with line breaks within values for display purposes   only):     {      "kty":"oct",      "k":"AyM1SysPpbyDfgZld3umj1qzKObwVMkoqQ-EstJQLr_T-1qS0gZH75           aKtMN3Yj0iPS4hcgUuTwjAzZr1Z9CAow"     }   The rest of this section shows complete representations for the two   JWSs above.Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 20164.1.  Example with Header Parameters {"alg":"HS256"}   The complete JWS representation for this example using the JWS   Compact Serialization and a non-detached payload (with line breaks   for display purposes only) is:     eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9     .     JC4wMg     .     5mvfOroL-g7HyqJoozehmsaqmvTYGEq5jTI1gVvoEoQ   Note that this JWS uses only features defined by [JWS] and does not   use the new "b64" Header Parameter.  It is the "control" so that   differences when it is used can be easily seen.   The equivalent representation for this example using the flattened   JWS JSON Serialization is:     {      "protected":       "eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9",      "payload":       "JC4wMg",      "signature":       "5mvfOroL-g7HyqJoozehmsaqmvTYGEq5jTI1gVvoEoQ"     }Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 20164.2.  Example with Header Parameters      {"alg":"HS256","b64":false,"crit":["b64"]}   The complete JWS representation for this example using the JWS   Compact Serialization and a detached payload (with line breaks for   display purposes only) is:     eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsImI2NCI6ZmFsc2UsImNyaXQiOlsiYjY0Il19     .     .     A5dxf2s96_n5FLueVuW1Z_vh161FwXZC4YLPff6dmDY   Note that the payload "$.02" cannot be represented in this JWS in its   unencoded form because it contains a period ('.') character, which   would cause parsing problems.  This JWS is therefore shown with a   detached payload.   The complete JWS representation for this example using the flattened   JWS JSON Serialization and a non-detached payload is:     {      "protected":       "eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsImI2NCI6ZmFsc2UsImNyaXQiOlsiYjY0Il19",      "payload":       "$.02",      "signature":       "A5dxf2s96_n5FLueVuW1Z_vh161FwXZC4YLPff6dmDY"     }   If using a detached payload with the JWS JSON Serialization, the   "payload" element would be omitted.5.  Unencoded Payload Content Restrictions   When the "b64" value is "false", different restrictions on the   payload contents apply, depending upon the circumstances, as   described in this section.  The restrictions prevent the use of   payload values that would cause errors parsing the resulting JWSs.   Note that because the character sets that can be used for unencoded   non-detached payloads differ between the two serializations, some   JWSs using a "b64" value of "false" cannot be syntactically converted   between the JWS JSON Serialization and the JWS Compact Serialization.   SeeSection 8 for security considerations on using unencoded   payloads.Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 20165.1.  Unencoded Detached PayloadAppendix F of [JWS] describes how to represent JWSs with detached   content.  A detached payload can contain any octet sequence   representable by the application.  The payload value will not cause   problems parsing the JWS, since it is not represented as part of the   JWS.  If an application uses a content encoding when representing the   payload, then it MUST specify whether the signature or MAC is   performed over the content-encoded representation or over the   unencoded content.5.2.  Unencoded JWS Compact Serialization Payload   When using the JWS Compact Serialization, unencoded non-detached   payloads using period ('.') characters would cause parsing errors;   such payloads MUST NOT be used with the JWS Compact Serialization.   Similarly, if a JWS using the JWS Compact Serialization and a   non-detached payload is to be transmitted in a context that requires   URL-safe characters, then the application MUST ensure that the   payload contains only the URL-safe characters 'a'-'z', 'A'-'Z',   '0'-'9', dash ('-'), underscore ('_'), and tilde ('~').  The payload   value is the ASCII representation of the characters in the payload   string.  The ASCII space character and all printable ASCII characters   other than period ('.') (those characters in the ranges %x20-2D and   %x2F-7E) MAY be included in a non-detached payload using the JWS   Compact Serialization, provided that the application can transmit the   resulting JWS without modification.   No meaning or special semantics are attached to any characters in the   payload.  For instance, the percent ('%') character represents itself   and is not used by JWS objects for percent-encoding [RFC3986].   Applications, of course, are free to utilize content-encoding rules   of their choosing, provided that the encoded representations utilize   only allowed payload characters.5.3.  Unencoded JWS JSON Serialization Payload   When using the JWS JSON Serialization, unencoded non-detached   payloads must consist of the octets of the UTF-8 encoding of a   sequence of Unicode code points that are representable in a JSON   string.  The payload value is determined after performing any JSON   string escape processing, perSection 8.3 of RFC 7159 [RFC7159], and   then UTF-8-encoding the resulting Unicode code points.  This means,   for instance, that these payloads represented as JSON strings are   equivalent ("$.02", "\u0024.02").  Unassigned Unicode code point   values MUST NOT be used to represent the payload.Jones                        Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 20166.  Using "crit" with "b64"   The "crit" Header Parameter MUST be included with "b64" in its set of   values when using the "b64" Header Parameter to cause implementations   not implementing "b64" to reject the JWS (instead of it being   misinterpreted).7.  Intended Use by Applications   Application profiles should specify whether "b64" with a "false"   value is to be used by the application in each application context or   not, with it then being consistently applied in each application   context.  For instance, an application that uses detached payloads   might specify that "b64" with a "false" value always be used.  It is   NOT RECOMMENDED that this parameter value be dynamically varied with   different payloads in the same application context.   While it is legal to use "b64" with a "true" value, it is RECOMMENDED   that "b64" simply be omitted in this case, since it would be   selecting the behavior already specified in [JWS].   For interoperability reasons, JSON Web Tokens [JWT] MUST NOT use   "b64" with a "false" value.8.  Security Considerations   [JWS] base64url-encodes the JWS Payload to restrict the set of   characters used to represent it so that the representation does not   contain characters used for delimiters in JWS representations.  Those   delimiters are the period ('.') character for the JWS Compact   Serialization and the double-quote ('"') character for the JWS JSON   Serialization.  When the "b64" (base64url-encode payload) value is   "false", these properties are lost.  It then becomes the   responsibility of the application to ensure that payloads only   contain characters that will not cause parsing problems for the   serialization used, as described inSection 5.  The application also   incurs the responsibility to ensure that the payload will not be   modified during transmission.   Note that if a JWS were to be created with a "b64" value of "false"   without including the "crit" Header Parameter with "b64" in its set   of values and it were to be received by an implementation not   supporting the "b64" Header Parameter, then the signature or MAC   would still verify but the recipient would believe that the intended   JWS Payload value is the base64url decoding of the payload value   received, rather than the payload value received itself.  For   example, if the payload value received were "NDA1", an implementation   not supporting this extension would interpret the intended payload asJones                        Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 2016   being the base64url decoding of this value, which is "405".   Requiring the use of the "crit" Header Parameter with "b64" in the   set of values prevents this misinterpretation.9.  IANA Considerations9.1.  JSON Web Signature and Encryption Header Parameter Registration   This specification registers the "b64" Header Parameter defined inSection 3 in the IANA "JSON Web Signature and Encryption Header   Parameters" registry [IANA.JOSE] established by [JWS].9.1.1.  Registry Contents   o  Header Parameter Name: "b64"   o  Header Parameter Description: Base64url-Encode Payload   o  Header Parameter Usage Location(s): JWS   o  Change Controller: IESG   o  Specification Document(s):Section 3 of RFC 779710.  References10.1.  Normative References   [IANA.JOSE]              IANA, "JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)",              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/jose>.   [JWA]      Jones, M., "JSON Web Algorithms (JWA)",RFC 7518,              DOI 10.17487/RFC7518, May 2015,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7518>.   [JWS]      Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web              Signature (JWS)",RFC 7515, DOI 10.17487/RFC7515, May              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7515>.   [JWT]      Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token              (JWT)",RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.   [RFC20]    Cerf, V., "ASCII format for Network Interchange", STD 80,RFC 20, October 1969,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc20>.   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119,              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.Jones                        Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 7797              JWS Unencoded Payload Option         February 2016   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO              10646", STD 63,RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November              2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.   [RFC7159]  Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data              Interchange Format",RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March              2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>.   [UNICODE]  The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard",              <http://www.unicode.org/versions/latest/>.10.2.  Informative References   [JWK]      Jones, M., "JSON Web Key (JWK)",RFC 7517,              DOI 10.17487/RFC7517, May 2015,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7517>.   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.Acknowledgements   Anders Rundgren, Richard Barnes, Phillip Hallam-Baker, Jim Schaad,   Matt Miller, Martin Thomson, and others have all made the case for   being able to use a representation of the payload that is not   base64url encoded in contexts in which it safe to do so.   Thanks to Sergey Beryozkin, Stephen Farrell, Benjamin Kaduk, James   Manger, Kathleen Moriarty, Axel Nennker, Anders Rundgren, Nat   Sakimura, Jim Schaad, Robert Sparks, and Matias Woloski for their   reviews of the specification, and thanks to Vladimir Dzhuvinov for   verifying the examples.Author's Address   Michael B. Jones   Microsoft   Email: mbj@microsoft.com   URI:http://self-issued.info/Jones                        Standards Track                   [Page 11]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp