Movatterモバイル変換

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

Obsoleted by:6931 PROPOSED STANDARD
Errata Exist

Network Working Group D. Eastlake 3rdRequest for Comments: 4051 Motorola LaboratoriesCategory: Standards Track April 2005Additional XML Security Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)Status of This Memo This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).Abstract A number of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) intended for use with XML Digital Signatures, Encryption, and Canonicalization are defined. These URIs identify algorithms and types of keying information.Table of Contents1. Introduction..................................................22. Algorithms....................................................32.1. DigestMethod Algorithms.................................32.1.1. MD5.............................................32.1.2. SHA-224.........................................32.1.3. SHA-384.........................................42.2. SignatureMethod Message Authentication Code Algorithms..42.2.1. HMAC-MD5........................................42.2.2. HMAC SHA Variations.............................52.2.3. HMAC-RIPEMD160..................................62.3. SignatureMethod Public Key Signature Algorithms.........62.3.1. RSA-MD5.........................................62.3.2. RSA-SHA256......................................72.3.3. RSA-SHA384......................................72.3.4. RSA-SHA512......................................72.3.5. RSA-RIPEMD160...................................82.3.6. ECDSA-SHA*......................................82.3.7. ESIGN-SHA1......................................82.4. Minimal Canonicalization................................92.5. Transform Algorithms....................................92.5.1. XPointer........................................9Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 1]

RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 20052.6. EncryptionMethod Algorithms.............................102.6.1. ARCFOUR Encryption Algorithm....................102.6.2. Camellia Block Encryption.......................102.6.3. Camellia Key Wrap...............................112.6.4. PSEC-KEM........................................113. KeyInfo.......................................................123.1. PKCS #7 Bag of Certificates and CRLs....................123.2. Additional RetrievalMethod Type Values..................124. IANA Considerations...........................................135. Security Considerations.......................................13 Acknowledgements..................................................13 Normative References..............................................13 Informative References............................................15 Author's Address..................................................16 Full Copyright Statement..........................................171. Introduction XML Digital Signatures, Canonicalization, and Encryption have been standardized by the W3C and the joint IETF/W3C XMLDSIG working group. All of these are now W3C Recommendations and IETF Informational or Standards Track documents. They are available as follows: IETF level W3C REC Topic ----------- ------- ----- [RFC3275] Draft Std [XMLDSIG] XML Digital Signatures [RFC3076] Info [CANON] Canonical XML - - - - - - [XMLENC] XML Encryption [RFC3741] Info [EXCANON] Exclusive XML Canonicalization All of these standards and recommendations use URIs [RFC2396] to identify algorithms and keying information types. This document provides a convenient reference list of URIs and descriptions for algorithms in which there is substantial interest, but which cannot or have not been included in the main documents. Note that raising XML digital signature to a Draft Standard in the IETF required removal of any algorithms for which interoperability from the main standards document has not been demonstrated. This required removal of the Minimal Canonicalization algorithm, in which there appears to be a continued interest, to be dropped from the standards track specification. It is included here. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 2]

RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 20052. Algorithms The URI [RFC2396] being dropped from the standard because of the transition from Proposed Standard to Draft Standard is included inSection 2.4 with its original prefix so as to avoid changing the XMLDSIG standard's namespace.http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig# Additional algorithms are given URIs that start with:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more# An "xmldsig-more" URI does not imply any official W3C status for these algorithms or identifiers or that they are only useful in digital signatures. Currently, dereferencing such URIs may or may not produce a temporary placeholder document. Permission to use this URI prefix has been given by the W3C.2.1. DigestMethod Algorithms These algorithms are usable wherever a DigestMethod element occurs.2.1.1. MD5 Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#md5 The MD5 algorithm [RFC1321] takes no explicit parameters. An example of an MD5 DigestAlgorithm element is: <DigestAlgorithm Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#md5"/> An MD5 digest is a 128-bit string. The content of the DigestValue element shall be the base64 [RFC2405] encoding of this bit string viewed as a 16-octet octet stream.2.1.2. SHA-224 Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha224 The SHA-224 algorithm [FIPS-180-2change,RFC3874] takes no explicit parameters. An example of a SHA-224 DigestAlgorithm element is:Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 3]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   <DigestAlgorithm      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha224" />   A SHA-224 digest is a 224 bit string.  The content of the DigestValue   element shall be the base64 [RFC2405] encoding of this string viewed   as a 28-octet stream.  Because it takes roughly the same amount of   effort to compute a SHA-224 message digest as a SHA-256 digest, and   terseness is usually not a criteria in an XML application,   consideration should be given to the use of SHA-256 as an   alternative.2.1.3.  SHA-384   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384   The SHA-384 algorithm [FIPS-180-2] takes no explicit parameters.  An   example of a SHA-384 DigestAlgorithm element is:   <DigestAlgorithm      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384" />   A SHA-384 digest is a 384 bit string.  The content of the DigestValue   element shall be the base64 [RFC2405] encoding of this string viewed   as a 48-octet stream.  Because it takes roughly the same amount of   effort to compute a SHA-384 message digest as a SHA-512 digest and   terseness is usually not a criteria in XML application, consideration   should be given to the use of SHA-512 as an alternative.2.2.  SignatureMethod Message Authentication Code Algorithms   Note: Some text in this section is duplicated from [RFC3275] for the   convenience of the reader.RFC 3275 is normative in case of   conflict.2.2.1.  HMAC-MD5   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5   The HMAC algorithm [RFC2104] takes the truncation length in bits as a   parameter; if the parameter is not specified then all the bits of the   hash are output.  An example of an HMAC-MD5 SignatureMethod element   is as follows:Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   <SignatureMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5">      <HMACOutputLength>112</HMACOutputLength>   </SignatureMethod>   The output of the HMAC algorithm is ultimately the output (possibly   truncated) of the chosen digest algorithm.  This value shall be   base64 [RFC2405] encoded in the same straightforward fashion as the   output of the digest algorithms.  For example, the SignatureValue   element for the HMAC-MD5 digest      9294727A 3638BB1C 13F48EF8 158BFC9D   from the test vectors in [RFC2104] would be      kpRyejY4uxwT9I74FYv8nQ==   Schema Definition:      <simpleType name="HMACOutputLength">         <restriction base="integer" />      </simpleType>   DTD:      <!ELEMENT HMACOutputLength (#PCDATA) >   The Schema Definition and DTD immediately shown above are taken from   [RFC3275].   Although some cryptographic suspicions have recently been cast on MD5   for use in signatures such as RSA-MD5 below, this does not effect use   of MD5 in HMAC.2.2.2.  HMAC SHA Variations   Identifiers:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha224http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha256http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha384http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha512   SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512 [FIPS-180-2, FIPS-180-2change,RFC3874] can also be used in HMAC as described insection 2.2.1 for   HMAC-MD5.Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 20052.2.3.  HMAC-RIPEMD160   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-ripemd160   RIPEMD-160 [RIPEMD-160] can also be used in HMAC as described insection 2.2.1 for HMAC-MD5.2.3.  SignatureMethod Public Key Signature Algorithms   These algorithms are distinguished from those inSection 2.2 in that   they use public key methods.  The verification key is different from   and not feasibly derivable from the signing key.2.3.1.  RSA-MD5   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5   RSA-MD5 implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm described in   [RFC3447].  An example of use is   <SignatureMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5" />   The SignatureValue content for an RSA-MD5 signature is the base64   [RFC2405] encoding of the octet string computed as per[RFC3447],   section 8.1.1, signature generation for the RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5   signature scheme.  As specified in the EMSA-PKCS1-V1_5-ENCODE   function in [RFC3447,section 9.2.1], the value input to the   signature function MUST contain a pre-pended algorithm object   identifier for the hash function, but the availability of an ASN.1   parser and recognition of OIDs are not required of a signature   verifier.  The PKCS#1 v1.5 representation appears as:      CRYPT (PAD (ASN.1 (OID, DIGEST (data))))   Note that the padded ASN.1 will be of the following form:      01 | FF* | 00 | prefix | hash   Vertical bar ("|") represents concatenation.  "01", "FF", and "00"   are fixed octets of the corresponding hexadecimal value and the   asterisk ("*") after "FF" indicates repetition.  "hash" is the MD5   digest of the data.  "prefix" is the ASN.1 BER MD5 algorithm   designator prefix required in PKCS #1 [RFC3447], that is:      hex 30 20 30 0c 06 08 2a 86 48 86 f7 0d 02 05 05 00 04 10Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   This prefix is included to facilitate the use of standard   cryptographic libraries.  The FF octet MUST be repeated enough times   that the value of the quantity being CRYPTed is exactly one octet   shorter than the RSA modulus.   Due to increases in computer processor power and advances in   cryptography, use of RSA-MD5 is NOT RECOMMENDED.2.3.2.  RSA-SHA256   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256   This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447] as described   insection 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-256 algorithm designator   prefix.  An example of use is:   <SignatureMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256" />2.3.3 RSA-SHA384   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384   This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447] as described   insection 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-384 algorithm designator   prefix.  An example of use is:   <SignatureMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384" />   Because it takes about the same effort to calculate a SHA-384 message   digest as a SHA-512 message digest, it is suggested that RSA-SHA512   be used in preference to RSA-SHA384 where possible.2.3.4.  RSA-SHA512   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512   This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447] as described   insection 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-512 algorithm designator   prefix.  An example of use is:   <SignatureMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512" />Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 20052.3.5.  RSA-RIPEMD160   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/rsa-ripemd160   This implies the PKCS#1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC3447], as   described insection 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER RIPEMD160   algorithm designator prefix.  An example of use is:   <SignatureMethod     Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/rsa-ripemd160" />2.3.6.  ECDSA-SHA*   Identifiershttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha1http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha224http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha256http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha384http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha512   The Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) [FIPS-186-2]   is the elliptic curve analogue of the DSA (DSS) signature method.   For detailed specifications on how to use it with SHA hash functions   and XML Digital Signature, please see [X9.62] and [ECDSA].2.3.7.  ESIGN-SHA1   Identifierhttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha224http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha256http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha384http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha512   The ESIGN algorithm specified in [IEEE-P1363a] is a signature scheme   based on the integer factorization problem.  It is much faster than   previous digital signature schemes so ESIGN can be implemented on   smart cards without special co-processors.   An example of use is:   <SignatureMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1" />Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 20052.4.  Minimal Canonicalization   Thus far two independent interoperable implementations of Minimal   Canonicalization have not been announced.  Therefore, when XML   Digital Signature was advanced from Proposed Standard [RFC3075] to   Draft Standard [RFC3275], Minimal Canonicalization was dropped from   the standards track documents.  However, there is still interest in   Minimal Canonicalization, indicating its possible future use.  For   its definition, see[RFC3075], Section 6.5.1.   For reference, its identifier remains:http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#minimal2.5.  Transform Algorithms   Note that all CanonicalizationMethod algorithms can also be used as   transform algorithms.2.5.1.  XPointer   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr   This transform algorithm takes an [XPointer] as an explicit   parameter.  An example of use is [RFC3092]:   <Transform      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr">      <XPointer         xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr">            xpointer(id("foo")) xmlns(bar=http://foobar.example)            xpointer(//bar:Zab[@Id="foo"])      </XPointer>   </Transform>   Schema Definition:      <element name="XPointer" type="string">   DTD:      <!ELEMENT XPointer (#PCDATA) >   Input to this transform is an octet stream (which is then parsed into   XML).Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   Output from this transform is a node set; the results of the XPointer   are processed as defined in the XMLDSIG specification [RFC3275] for a   same document XPointer.2.6.  EncryptionMethod Algorithms   This subsection gives identifiers and information for several   EncryptionMethod Algorithms.2.6.1.  ARCFOUR Encryption Algorithm   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour   ARCFOUR is a fast, simple stream encryption algorithm that is   compatible with RSA Security's RC4 algorithm.  An example of the   EncryptionMethod element using ARCFOUR is   <EncryptionMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour">      <KeySize>40</KeySize>   </EncryptionMethod>   Note that Arcfour makes use of the generic KeySize parameter   specified and defined in [XMLENC].2.6.2.  Camellia Block Encryption   Identifiers:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbchttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia192-cbchttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia256-cbc   Camellia is an efficient and secure block cipher with the same   interface as the AES [Camellia,RFC3713], that is 128-bit block size   and 128, 192, and 256 bit key sizes.  In XML Encryption, Camellia is   used in the same way as the AES: It is used in the Cipher Block   Chaining (CBC) mode with a 128-bit initialization vector (IV).  The   resulting cipher text is prefixed by the IV.  If included in XML   output, it is then base64 encoded.  An example Camellia   EncryptionMethod is as follows:   <EncryptionMethod      Algorithm=      "http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbc" />Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 20052.6.3.  Camellia Key Wrap   Identifiers:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia192http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia256   The Camellia [Camellia,RFC3713] key wrap is identical to the AES key   wrap algorithm [RFC3394] specified in the XML Encryption standard   with "AES" replaced by "Camellia".  As with AES key wrap, the check   value is 0xA6A6A6A6A6A6A6A6.   The algorithm is the same regardless of the size of the Camellia key   used in wrapping (called the key encrypting key or KEK).  The   implementation of Camellia is OPTIONAL.  However, if it is supported,   the same implementation guidelines of which combinations of KEK size   and wrapped key size should be required to be supported and which are   optional to be supported should be followed as for AES.  That is to   say, if Camellia key wrap is supported, then wrapping 128-bit keys   with a 128-bit KEK and wrapping 256-bit keys with a 256-bit KEK are   REQUIRED and all other combinations are OPTIONAL.   An example of use is:   <EncryptionMethod      Algorithm=      "http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128" />2.6.4.  PSEC-KEM   Identifier:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#psec-kem   The PSEC-KEM algorithm, specified in [ISO/IEC-18033-2], is a key   encapsulation mechanism using elliptic curve encryption.   An example of use is:   <EncryptionMethod      Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#psec-kem">      <ECParameters>         <Version>version</Version>         <FieldID>id</FieldID>         <Curve>curve</Curve>         <Base>base</Base>         <Order>order</Order>         <Cofactor>cofactor</Cofactor>      </ECParameters>Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                    [Page 11]

RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 2005 </EncryptionMethod> See [ISO/IEC-18033-2] for information on the parameters above.3. KeyInfo Insection 3.1 a new KeyInfo element child is specified, while insection 3.2 additional KeyInfo Type values for use in RetrievalMethod are specified.3.1. PKCS #7 Bag of Certificates and CRLs A PKCS #7 [RFC2315] "signedData" can also be used as a bag of certificates and/or certificate revocation lists (CRLs). The PKCS7signedData element is defined to accommodate such structures within KeyInfo. The binary PKCS #7 structure is base64 [RFC2405] encoded. Any signer information present is ignored. The following is an example, eliding the base64 data [RFC3092]: <foo:PKCS7signedData xmlns:foo="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more"> ... </foo:PKCS7signedData>3.2. Additional RetrievalMethod Type Values The Type attribute of RetrievalMethod is an optional identifier for the type of data to be retrieved. The result of dereferencing a RetrievalMethod reference for all KeyInfo types with an XML structure is an XML element or document with that element as the root. The various "raw" key information types return a binary value. Thus, they require a Type attribute because they are not unambiguously parseable. Identifiers:http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyValuehttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#RetrievalMethodhttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyNamehttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawX509CRLhttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPGPKeyPackethttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawSPKISexphttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedDatahttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPKCS7signedDataEastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 12]

RFC 4051 Additional XML Security URIs April 20054. IANA Considerations As it is easy for people to construct their own unique URIs [RFC2396] and possibly obtain a URI from the W3C if appropriate, it is not intended that any additional "http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#" URIs be created beyond those enumerated in this document. (W3C Namespace stability rules prohibit the creation of new URIs under "http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#".)5. Security Considerations Due to computer speed and cryptographic advances, the use of MD5 as a DigestMethod and the use of MD5 in the RSA-MD5 SignatureMethod is NOT RECOMMENDED. The concerned cryptographic advances do not effect the security of HMAC-MD5; however, there is little reason not to use one of the SHA series of algorithms.Acknowledgements Glenn Adams, Merlin Hughs, Gregor Karlinger, Brian LaMachia, Shiho Moriai, Joseph Reagle, Russ Housley, and Joel Halpern.Normative References [Camellia] "Camellia: A 128-bit Block Cipher Suitable for Multiple Platforms - Design and Analysis -", K. Aoki, T. Ichikawa, M. Matsui, S. Moriai, J. Nakajima, T. Tokita, In Selected Areas in Cryptography, 7th Annual International Workshop, SAC 2000, August 2000, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2012, pp. 39-56, Springer- Verlag, 2001. [ECDSA] Blake-Wilson, S., Karlinger, G., Kobayashi, T., and Y. Wang, "Using the Elliptic Curve Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) for XML Digital Signatures",RFC4050, April 2005. [FIPS-180-2] "Secure Hash Standard", (SHA-1/256/384/512) US Federal Information Processing Standard, 1 August 2002. [FIPS-180-2change] "FIPS 180-2, Secure Hash Standard Change Notice 1", adds SHA-224 to [FIPS 180-2], 25 February 2004. [FIPS-186-2] "Digital Signature Standard", National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2000.Eastlake 3rd Standards Track [Page 13]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   [IEEE-P1363a]      "Standard Specifications for Public Key                      Cryptography:  Additional Techniques", October                      2002.   [ISO/IEC-18033-2]  "Information technology -- Security techniques --                      Encryption algorithms -- Part 3: Asymmetric                      ciphers", CD, October 2002.   [RFC1321]          Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm ",RFC 1321, April 1992.   [RFC2104]          Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC:                      Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication",RFC2104, February 1997.   [RFC2119]          Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to                      Indicate Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119,                      March 1997.   [RFC2396]          Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter,                      "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic                      Syntax",RFC 2396, August 1998.   [RFC2405]          Madson, C. and N. Doraswamy, "The ESP DES-CBC                      Cipher Algorithm With Explicit IV",RFC 2405,                      November 1998.   [RFC2315]          Kaliski, B., "PKCS #7: Cryptographic Message                      Syntax Version 1.5",RFC 2315, March 1998.   [RFC3075]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo, "XML-                      Signature Syntax and Processing",RFC 3075, March                      2001. (RFC 3075 was obsoleted byRFC 3275 but is                      referenced in this document for its description of                      Minimal Canonicalization which was dropped inRFC3275.)   [RFC3275]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo,                      "(Extensible Markup Language) XML-Signature Syntax                      and Processing",RFC 3275, March 2002.   [RFC3394]          Schaad, J. and R. Housley, "Advanced Encryption                      Standard (AES) Key Wrap Algorithm",RFC 3394,                      September 2002.Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                    [Page 14]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   [RFC3447]          Jonsson, J. and B. Kaliski, "Public-Key                      Cryptography Standards (PKCS) #1: RSA Cryptography                      Specifications Version 2.1",RFC 3447, February                      2003.   [RFC3713]          Matsui, M., Nakajima, J., and S. Moriai, "A                      Description of the Camellia Encryption Algorithm",RFC 3713, April 2004.   [RFC3874]          Housley, R., "A 224-bit One-way Hash Function:                      SHA-224",RFC 3874, September 2004.   [RIPEMD-160]       ISO/IEC 10118-3:1998, "Information Technology -                      Security techniques - Hash-functions - Part3:                      Dedicated hash- functions", ISO, 1998.   [X9.62]            X9.62-200X, "Public Key Cryptography for the                      Financial Services Industry: The Elliptic Curve                      Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)", Accredited                      Standards Committee X9, American National                      Standards Institute.   [XMLDSIG]          "XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", D. Eastlake                      3rd, J. Reagle, & D. Solo, 12 February 2002.                      <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/>   [XMLENC]           "XML Encryption Syntax and Processing", J. Reagle,                      D.  Eastlake, December 2002.                      <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/RED-xmlenc-core-20021210/>   [XPointer]         "XML Pointer Language (XPointer) Version 1.0", W3C                      working draft, Steve DeRose, Eve Maler, Ron Daniel                      Jr., January 2001.                      <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xptr-20010108>Informative References   [CANON]            "Canonical XML Version 1.0", John Boyer.                      <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315>.   [EXCANON]          "Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0", D.                      Eastlake, J. Reagle, 18 July 2002.                      <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-enc-c14n-20020718/>.   [RFC3076]          Boyer, J., "Canonical XML Version 1.0",RFC 3076,                      March 2001.Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                    [Page 15]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005   [RFC3092]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Manros, C., and E. Raymond,                      "Etymology of "Foo"",RFC 3092, 2001.   [RFC3741]          Boyer, J., Eastlake 3rd, D., and J. Reagle,                      "Exclusive XML Canonicalization, Version 1.0",RFC3741, March 2004.Author's Address   Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   Motorola Laboratories   155 Beaver Street   Milford, MA 01757 USA   Phone: +1-508-786-7554 (w)          +1-508-634-2066 (h)   EMail: Donald.Eastlake@motorola.comEastlake 3rd                Standards Track                    [Page 16]

RFC 4051              Additional XML Security URIs            April 2005Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions   contained inBCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors   retain all their rights.   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.Intellectual Property   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be   found inBCP 78 andBCP 79.   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository athttp://www.ietf.org/ipr.   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-   ipr@ietf.org.Acknowledgement   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the   Internet Society.Eastlake 3rd                Standards Track                    [Page 17]

[8]ページ先頭