Network Working Group                                          M. Friedl
Request for Comments: 4419                                     N. Provos
Category: Standards Track                                     W. Simpson
                                                             March 2006


                  Diffie-Hellman Group Exchange for
           the Secure Shell (SSH) Transport Layer Protocol

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 (2006).

Abstract

  This memo describes a new key exchange method for the Secure Shell
  (SSH) protocol.  It allows the SSH server to propose new groups on
  which to perform the Diffie-Hellman key exchange to the client.  The
  proposed groups need not be fixed and can change with time.

1.  Overview and Rationale

  SSH [RFC4251] is a very common protocol for secure remote login on
  the Internet.  Currently, SSH performs the initial key exchange using
  the "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" method [RFC4253].  This method
  prescribes a fixed group on which all operations are performed.

  The Diffie-Hellman key exchange provides a shared secret that cannot
  be determined by either party alone.  Furthermore, the shared secret
  is known only to the participant parties.  In SSH, the key exchange
  is signed with the host key to provide host authentication.

  The security of the Diffie-Hellman key exchange is based on the
  difficulty of solving the Discrete Logarithm Problem (DLP).  Since we
  expect that the SSH protocol will be in use for many years in the
  future, we fear that extensive precomputation and more efficient
  algorithms to compute the discrete logarithm over a fixed group might
  pose a security threat to the SSH protocol.





Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


  The ability to propose new groups will reduce the incentive to use
  precomputation for more efficient calculation of the discrete
  logarithm.  The server can constantly compute new groups in the
  background.

2.  Requirements Notation

  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].

3.  Diffie-Hellman Group and Key Exchange

  The server keeps a list of safe primes and corresponding generators
  that it can select from.  A prime p is safe if p = 2q + 1 and q is
  prime.  New primes can be generated in the background.

  The generator g should be chosen such that the order of the generated
  subgroup does not factor into small primes; that is, with p = 2q + 1,
  the order has to be either q or p - 1.  If the order is p - 1, then
  the exponents generate all possible public values, evenly distributed
  throughout the range of the modulus p, without cycling through a
  smaller subset.  Such a generator is called a "primitive root" (which
  is trivial to find when p is "safe").

  The client requests a modulus from the server indicating the
  preferred size.  In the following description (C is the client, S is
  the server, the modulus p is a large safe prime, and g is a generator
  for a subgroup of GF(p), min is the minimal size of p in bits that is
  acceptable to the client, n is the size of the modulus p in bits that
  the client would like to receive from the server, max is the maximal
  size of p in bits that the client can accept, V_S is S's version
  string, V_C is C's version string, K_S is S's public host key, I_C is
  C's KEXINIT message, and I_S is S's KEXINIT message that has been
  exchanged before this part begins):

  1.  C sends "min || n || max" to S, indicating the minimal acceptable
      group size, the preferred size of the group, and the maximal
      group size in bits the client will accept.

  2.  S finds a group that best matches the client's request, and sends
      "p || g" to C.

  3.  C generates a random number x, where 1 < x < (p-1)/2.  It
      computes e = g^x mod p, and sends "e" to S.






Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


  4.  S generates a random number y, where 0 < y < (p-1)/2, and
      computes f = g^y mod p.  S receives "e".  It computes K = e^y mod
      p, H = hash(V_C || V_S || I_C || I_S || K_S || min || n || max ||
      p || g || e || f || K) (these elements are encoded according to
      their types; see below), and signature s on H with its private
      host key.  S sends "K_S || f || s" to C.  The signing operation
      may involve a second hashing operation.

  5.  C verifies that K_S really is the host key for S (e.g., using
      certificates or a local database to obtain the public key).  C is
      also allowed to accept the key without verification; however,
      doing so will render the protocol insecure against active attacks
      (but may be desirable for practical reasons in the short term in
      many environments).  C then computes K = f^x mod p, H = hash(V_C
      || V_S || I_C || I_S || K_S || min || n || max || p || g || e ||
      f || K), and verifies the signature s on H.

  Servers and clients SHOULD support groups with a modulus length of k
  bits, where 1024 <= k <= 8192.  The recommended values for min and
  max are 1024 and 8192, respectively.

  Either side MUST NOT send or accept e or f values that are not in the
  range [1, p-1].  If this condition is violated, the key exchange
  fails.  To prevent confinement attacks, they MUST accept the shared
  secret K only if 1 < K < p - 1.

  The server should return the smallest group it knows that is larger
  than the size the client requested.  If the server does not know a
  group that is larger than the client request, then it SHOULD return
  the largest group it knows.  In all cases, the size of the returned
  group SHOULD be at least 1024 bits.

  This is implemented with the following messages.  The hash algorithm
  for computing the exchange hash is defined by the method name, and is
  called HASH.  The public key algorithm for signing is negotiated with
  the KEXINIT messages.

  First, the client sends:

    byte    SSH_MSG_KEY_DH_GEX_REQUEST
    uint32  min, minimal size in bits of an acceptable group
    uint32  n, preferred size in bits of the group the server will send
    uint32  max, maximal size in bits of an acceptable group








Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


  The server responds with

    byte    SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_GROUP
    mpint   p, safe prime
    mpint   g, generator for subgroup in GF(p)

  The client responds with:

    byte    SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_INIT
    mpint   e

  The server responds with:

    byte    SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REPLY
    string  server public host key and certificates (K_S)
    mpint   f
    string  signature of H

  The hash H is computed as the HASH hash of the concatenation of the
  following:

    string  V_C, the client's version string (CR and NL excluded)
    string  V_S, the server's version string (CR and NL excluded)
    string  I_C, the payload of the client's SSH_MSG_KEXINIT
    string  I_S, the payload of the server's SSH_MSG_KEXINIT
    string  K_S, the host key
    uint32  min, minimal size in bits of an acceptable group
    uint32  n, preferred size in bits of the group the server will send
    uint32  max, maximal size in bits of an acceptable group
    mpint   p, safe prime
    mpint   g, generator for subgroup
    mpint   e, exchange value sent by the client
    mpint   f, exchange value sent by the server
    mpint   K, the shared secret

  This value is called the exchange hash, and it is used to
  authenticate the key exchange as per [RFC4253].

4.  Key Exchange Methods

  This document defines two new key exchange methods:
  "diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha1" and
  "diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha256".








Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


4.1.  diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha1

  The "diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha1" method specifies
  Diffie-Hellman Group and Key Exchange with SHA-1 [FIPS-180-2] as
  HASH.

4.2.  diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha256

  The "diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha256" method specifies
  Diffie-Hellman Group and Key Exchange with SHA-256 [FIPS-180-2] as
  HASH.

  Note that the hash used in key exchange (in this case, SHA-256) must
  also be used in the key derivation pseudo-random function (PRF), as
  per the requirement in the "Output from Key Exchange" section in
  [RFC4253].

5.  Summary of Message Numbers

  The following message numbers have been defined in this document.
  They are in a name space private to this document and not assigned by
  IANA.

    #define SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REQUEST_OLD  30
    #define SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REQUEST      34
    #define SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_GROUP        31
    #define SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_INIT         32
    #define SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REPLY        33

  SSH_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REQUEST_OLD is used for backward compatibility.
  Instead of sending "min || n || max", the client only sends "n".  In
  addition, the hash is calculated using only "n" instead of "min || n
  || max".

  The numbers 30-49 are key exchange specific and may be redefined by
  other kex methods.

6.  Implementation Notes

6.1.  Choice of Generator

  One useful technique is to select the generator, and then limit the
  modulus selection sieve to primes with that generator:

     2   when p (mod 24) = 11.
     5   when p (mod 10) = 3 or 7.





Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


  It is recommended to use 2 as generator, because it improves
  efficiency in multiplication performance.  It is usable even when it
  is not a primitive root, as it still covers half of the space of
  possible residues.

6.2.  Private Exponents

  To increase the speed of the key exchange, both client and server may
  reduce the size of their private exponents.  It should be at least
  twice as long as the key material that is generated from the shared
  secret.  For more details, see the paper by van Oorschot and Wiener
  [VAN-OORSCHOT].

7.  Security Considerations

  This protocol aims to be simple and uses only well-understood
  primitives.  This encourages acceptance by the community and allows
  for ease of implementation, which hopefully leads to a more secure
  system.

  The use of multiple moduli inhibits a determined attacker from
  precalculating moduli exchange values, and discourages dedication of
  resources for analysis of any particular modulus.

  It is important to employ only safe primes as moduli, as they allow
  us to find a generator g so that the order of the generated subgroup
  does not factor into small primes, that is, with p = 2q + 1, the
  order has to be either q or p - 1.  If the order is p - 1, then the
  exponents generate all possible public values, evenly distributed
  throughout the range of the modulus p, without cycling through a
  smaller subset.  Van Oorshot and Wiener note that using short private
  exponents with a random prime modulus p makes the computation of the
  discrete logarithm easy [VAN-OORSCHOT].  However, they also state
  that this problem does not apply to safe primes.

  The least significant bit of the private exponent can be recovered
  when the modulus is a safe prime [MENEZES].  However, this is not a
  problem if the size of the private exponent is big enough.  Related
  to this, Waldvogel and Massey note: When private exponents are chosen
  independently and uniformly at random from {0,...,p-2}, the key
  entropy is less than 2 bits away from the maximum, lg(p-1)
  [WALDVOGEL].

  The security considerations in [RFC4251] also apply to this key
  exchange method.






Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


8.  Acknowledgements

  The document is derived in part from "SSH Transport Layer Protocol"
  [RFC4253] by T. Ylonen, T. Kivinen, M. Saarinen, T.  Rinne, and S.
  Lehtinen.

  Markku-Juhani Saarinen pointed out that the least significant bit of
  the private exponent can be recovered efficiently when using safe
  primes and a subgroup with an order divisible by two.

  Bodo Moeller suggested that the server send only one group, reducing
  the complexity of the implementation and the amount of data that
  needs to be exchanged between client and server.






































Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


Appendix A:  Generation of Safe Primes

  The "Handbook of Applied Cryptography" [MENEZES] lists the following
  algorithm to generate a k-bit safe prime p.  It has been modified so
  that 2 is a generator for the multiplicative group mod p.

  1.  Do the following:

      1.  Select a random (k-1)-bit prime q, so that q mod 12 = 5.

      2.  Compute p := 2q + 1, and test whether p is prime (using,
          e.g., trial division and the Rabin-Miller test).

  2.  Repeat until p is prime.

  If an implementation uses the OpenSSL libraries, a group consisting
  of a 1024-bit safe prime and 2 as generator can be created as
  follows:

      DH *d = NULL;
      d = DH_generate_parameters(1024, DH_GENERATOR_2, NULL, NULL);
      BN_print_fp(stdout, d->p);

  The order of the subgroup generated by 2 is q = p - 1.

References

Normative References

  [FIPS-180-2]   National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
                 "Secure Hash Standard (SHS)", FIPS PUB 180-2,
                 August 2002.

  [RFC4251]      Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, "The Secure Shell (SSH)
                 Protocol Architecture", RFC 4251, January 2006.

  [RFC4253]      Lonvick, C., "The Secure Shell (SSH) Transport Layer
                 Protocol", RFC 4253, January 2006.

  [RFC2119]      Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

Informative References

  [MENEZES]      Menezes, A., van Oorschot, P., and S. Vanstone,
                 "Handbook of Applied Cryptography", CRC Press, p. 537,
                 1996.




Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


  [VAN-OORSCHOT] van Oorschot, P. and M. Wiener, "On Diffie-Hellman key
                 agreement with short exponents", Advances in
                 Cryptology -EUROCRYPT'96, LNCS 1070,
                 Springer-Verlag, pp. 332-343, 1996.

  [WALDVOGEL]    Waldvogel, C. and J. Massey, "The probability
                 distribution of the Diffie-Hellman key", Proceedings
                 of AUSCRYPT 92, LNCS 718, Springer-Verlag, pp.
                 492-504, 1993.

Authors' Addresses

  Markus Friedl
  EMail: [email protected]


  Niels Provos
  EMail: [email protected]


  William A. Simpson
  EMail: [email protected]





























Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 4419                 SSH DH Group Exchange                March 2006


Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

  This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
  contained in BCP 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 in BCP 78 and BCP 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 at
  http://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
  [email protected].

Acknowledgement

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
  Administrative Support Activity (IASA).







Friedl, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 10]