Network Working Group                                          K. Luehrs
Request for Comments: 3634                                     CableLabs
Category: Standards Track                                      R. Woundy
                                                          Comcast Cable
                                                          J. Bevilacqua
                                                             N. Davoust
                                                        YAS Corporation
                                                          December 2003


     Key Distribution Center (KDC) Server Address Sub-option for
           the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP)
             CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Option

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 (2003).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

  This document defines a new sub-option for the CableLabs Client
  Configuration (CCC) Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option
  code for conveying the network addresses of Key Distribution Center
  (KDC) servers.

1.  Introduction

  A CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Dynamic Host Configuration
  Protocol (DHCP) Option code providing the Key Distribution Center
  (KDC) server address will be needed for CableHome-compliant
  residential gateways configured to use Kerberos for authentication as
  the first step in establishing a secure SNMPv3 link between the
  Portal Service (PS) logical element [2,3] in residential gateways,
  and the SNMP entity in the cable operator's data network.

  The CCC DHCP option code will be used to address specific needs of
  CableLabs client devices during their configuration processes.  This
  document proposes a sub-option for the CCC DHCP option.





Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 3634             KDC Server Address Sub-option         December 2003


  Configuration of a class of CableLabs client devices described in [2]
  and [3] will require a DHCP sub-option to provide the client with the
  network address of a KDC server in the cable operator's data network.

  The class of devices assumed in [2] and [3] is unlike the class of
  devices considered in [1], which perform a DNS lookup of the Kerberos
  Realm name to find the KDC server network address.

  This document proposes a sub-option of the CCC DHCP option code for
  use with CableLabs client devices.  The proposed sub-option encodes
  an identifier for the network address of each of one or more Key
  Distribution Center servers with which the CableLabs client device
  exchanges security information.

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT" and "MAY" in
  this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119
  [4].

2.  Key Distribution Center IP Address Sub-option

  CableHome specifications will specify the Key Distribution Center
  network address encoding as a sub-option of the CCC DHCP Option code.
  This field will be used to inform the client device of the network
  address of one or more Key Distribution Center servers.

  The encoding of the KDC Server Address sub-option will adhere to the
  format of an IPv4 address.  The minimum length for this option is 4
  octets, and the length MUST always be a multiple of 4.  If multiple
  KDC Servers are listed, they MUST be listed in decreasing order of
  priority.  The format of the KDC Server Address sub-option of the CCC
  option code is as shown below:

   SubOpt  Len      Address 1               Address 2
  +------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+--
  |  10  |  n  |  a1 |  a2 |  a3 |  a4 |  a1 |  a2 |  ...
  +------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+--

3.  Security Considerations

  This document relies upon the DHCP protocol [5] for authentication
  and security, i.e., it does not provide security in excess of what
  DHCP is (or will be) providing.  Potential exposures to attack in the
  DHCP protocol are discussed in section 7 of the DHCP protocol
  specification [5] and in Authentication for DHCP Messages [6].

  The CCC option can be used to misdirect network traffic by providing
  incorrect DHCP server addresses, incorrect provisioning server
  addresses, and incorrect Kerberos realm names to a CableLabs client



Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 3634             KDC Server Address Sub-option         December 2003


  device.  This misdirection can lead to several threat scenarios.  A
  Denial of Service (DoS) attack can result from address information
  being simply invalid.  A man-in-the-middle attack can be mounted by
  providing addresses to a potential snooper.  A malicious service
  provider can steal customers from the customer selected service
  provider, by altering the Kerberos realm designation.

  These threats are mitigated by several factors.

  Within the cable delivery architecture required by CableLabs'
  PacketCable, DOCSIS, and CableHome specifications, the DHCP client is
  connected to a network through a cable modem and the Cable Modem
  Termination System (CMTS).  The CMTS is explicitly configured with a
  set of DHCP servers to which DHCP requests are forwarded.  Further, a
  correctly configured CMTS will only allow downstream traffic from
  specific IP addresses/ ranges.

  Assuming that server addresses were successfully spoofed to the point
  that a malicious client device was able to contact a KDC, the client
  device must still present valid certificates to the KDC before being
  service enabled.  Given the computational overhead of the certificate
  validation process, this situation could present a DoS opportunity.

  It is possible for a malicious (although certificate enabled) service
  provider to redirect a customer from the customer's selected service
  provider.  It is assumed that all service providers permitted onto an
  access providers network are trusted entities that will cooperate to
  ensure peaceful coexistence.  If a service provider is found to be
  redirecting customers, this should be handled as an administrative
  matter between the access provider and the service provider.

  Another safeguard that can be taken by service providers to limit
  their exposure to their KDC server(s) is to configure their network
  so that the KDC(s) reside on a separate subnetwork.

  Service providers can further protect their KDC server(s) by placing
  a firewall in front of the KDC(s) only allowing connections needed
  for its current provisioning processes.  The IP temporary addresses
  given the client devices from the DHCP server could be sent directly
  to the firewall from the DHCP server to open a hole for Kerberos
  messages only for those particular IP addresses for a short period of
  time.  If this was used it would be recommended that service
  providers authenticate their DHCP server to the KDC as well.  This
  could be done via password authentication rather than digital
  certificate due to the co-location of the DHCP server to the KDC.






Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 3634             KDC Server Address Sub-option         December 2003


  Finally, Kerberos requires mutual client-server authentication.
  Therefore, the client device must authenticate itself with its
  digital certificate and the KDC is required to authenticate it to the
  client device.  If a hacker tries to redirect the client device by
  replacing the service provider-configured KDC Server Address sub-
  option with another IP address, it is not likely to be a valid
  service provider's KDC server and authentication will fail.

4.  IANA Considerations

  The KDC Server Address sub-option described in this document is
  intended to be a sub-option of the CableLabs Client Configuration
  (CCC) option described in [1].  IANA has assigned and registered
  sub-option code 10 of the CCC option to the KDC Server Address sub-
  option.

5.  Intellectual Property Statement

  The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
  intellectual property 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; neither does it represent that it
  has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the
  IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
  standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11.  Copies of
  claims of rights made available for publication 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 implementors or users of this specification can
  be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

  The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
  copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
  rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
  this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive
  Director.














Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 3634             KDC Server Address Sub-option         December 2003


6.  Normative References

  [1]  Beser, B. and P. Duffy, "DHCP Option for CableLabs Client
       Configuration", RFC 3495, March 2003.

  [2]  "CableHome 1.1 Specification", CableLabs,
       http://www.cablelabs.com/projects/cablehome/specifications/.

  [3]  "CableHome 1.0 Specification", CableLabs,
       http://www.cablelabs.com/projects/cablehome/specifications/.

  [4]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
       Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

  [5]  Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 2131,
       March 1997.

  [6]  Droms, R. and W. Arbaugh, "Authentication for DHCP Messages",
       RFC 3118, June 2001
































Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 3634             KDC Server Address Sub-option         December 2003


7.  Authors' Addresses

  Kevin Luehrs
  CableLabs
  858 Coal Creek Circle
  Louisville, CO 80027

  Phone: (303) 661-9100
  EMail: [email protected]


  Richard Woundy
  Comcast Cable
  27 Industrial Drive
  Chelmsford, MA 01824

  Phone: (978) 244-4010
  EMail: [email protected]


  John Bevilacqua
  YAS Corporation
  300 Brickstone Square
  Andover, MA 01810

  Phone: (978) 749-9999
  EMail: [email protected]


  Nancy Davoust
  YAS Corporation
  300 Brickstone Square
  Andover, MA 01810

  Phone: (978) 749-9999
  EMail: [email protected]















Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 3634             KDC Server Address Sub-option         December 2003


8.  Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.

  This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
  others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
  or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
  and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
  kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
  included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
  document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
  the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
  Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
  developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
  copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
  followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
  English.

  The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
  revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.

  This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
  TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.

Acknowledgement

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
  Internet Society.



















Luehrs, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 7]