Network Working Group                                          C. Madson
Request for Comments: 2403                            Cisco Systems Inc.
Category: Standards Track                                       R. Glenn
                                                                   NIST
                                                          November 1998


               The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH

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 (1998).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

  This memo describes the use of the HMAC algorithm [RFC-2104] in
  conjunction with the MD5 algorithm [RFC-1321] as an authentication
  mechanism within the revised IPSEC Encapsulating Security Payload
  [ESP] and the revised IPSEC Authentication Header [AH]. HMAC with MD5
  provides data origin authentication and integrity protection.

  Further information on the other components necessary for ESP and AH
  implementations is provided by [Thayer97a].

1.  Introduction

  This memo specifies the use of MD5 [RFC-1321] combined with HMAC
  [RFC-2104] as a keyed authentication mechanism within the context of
  the Encapsulating Security Payload and the Authentication Header.
  The goal of HMAC-MD5-96 is to ensure that the packet is authentic and
  cannot be modified in transit.

  HMAC is a secret key authentication algorithm. Data integrity and
  data origin authentication as provided by HMAC are dependent upon the
  scope of the distribution of the secret key. If only the source and
  destination know the HMAC key, this provides both data origin
  authentication and data integrity for packets sent between the two
  parties; if the HMAC is correct, this proves that it must have been
  added by the source.




Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 2403        The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH   November 1998


  In this memo, HMAC-MD5-96 is used within the context of ESP and AH.
  For further information on how the various pieces of ESP - including
  the confidentiality mechanism -- fit together to provide security
  services, refer to [ESP] and [Thayer97a]. For further information on
  AH, refer to [AH] and [Thayer97a].

  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 [RFC-2119].

2. Algorithm and Mode

  [RFC-1321] describes the underlying MD5 algorithm, while [RFC-2104]
  describes the HMAC algorithm. The HMAC algorithm provides a framework
  for inserting various hashing algorithms such as MD5.

  HMAC-MD5-96 operates on 64-byte blocks of data.  Padding requirements
  are specified in [RFC-1321] and are part of the MD5 algorithm.  If
  MD5 is built according to [RFC-1321], there is no need to add any
  additional padding as far as HMAC-MD5-96 is concerned.  With regard
  to "implicit packet padding" as defined in [AH], no implicit packet
  padding is required.

  HMAC-MD5-96 produces a 128-bit authenticator value.  This 128-bit
  value can be truncated as described in RFC 2104.  For use with either
  ESP or AH, a truncated value using the first 96 bits MUST be
  supported.  Upon sending, the truncated value is stored within the
  authenticator field.  Upon receipt, the entire 128-bit value is
  computed and the first 96 bits are compared to the value stored in
  the authenticator field.  No other authenticator value lengths are
  supported by HMAC-MD5-96.

  The length of 96 bits was selected because it is the default
  authenticator length as specified in [AH] and meets the security
  requirements described in [RFC-2104].

2.1  Performance

  [Bellare96a] states that "(HMAC) performance is essentially that of
  the underlying hash function".  [RFC-1810] provides some performance
  analysis and recommendations of the use of MD5 with Internet
  protocols.  As of this writing no performance analysis has been done
  of HMAC or HMAC combined with MD5.

  [RFC-2104] outlines an implementation modification which can improve
  per-packet performance without affecting interoperability.





Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 2403        The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH   November 1998


3. Keying Material

  HMAC-MD5-96 is a secret key algorithm. While no fixed key length is
  specified in [RFC-2104], for use with either ESP or AH a fixed key
  length of 128-bits MUST be supported.  Key lengths other than 128-
  bits MUST NOT be supported (i.e. only 128-bit keys are to be used by
  HMAC-MD5-96).  A key length of 128-bits was chosen based on the
  recommendations in [RFC-2104] (i.e. key lengths less than the
  authenticator length decrease security strength and keys longer than
  the authenticator length do not significantly increase security
  strength).

  [RFC-2104] discusses requirements for key material, which includes a
  discussion on requirements for strong randomness.  A strong pseudo-
  random function MUST be used to generate the required 128-bit key.

  At the time of this writing there are no specified weak keys for use
  with HMAC.  This does not mean to imply that weak keys do not exist.
  If, at some point, a set of weak keys for HMAC are identified, the
  use of these weak keys must be rejected followed by a request for
  replacement keys or a newly negotiated Security Association.

  [ARCH] describes the general mechanism for obtaining keying material
  when multiple keys are required for a single SA (e.g. when an ESP SA
  requires a key for confidentiality and a key for authentication).

  In order to provide data origin authentication, the key distribution
  mechanism must ensure that unique keys are allocated and that they
  are distributed only to the parties participating in the
  communication.

  [RFC-2104] makes the following recommendation with regard to
  rekeying.  Current attacks do not indicate a specific recommended
  frequency for key changes as these attacks are practically
  infeasible.  However, periodic key refreshment is a fundamental
  security practice that helps against potential weaknesses of the
  function and keys, reduces the information avaliable to a
  cryptanalyst, and limits the damage of an exposed key.

4.  Interaction with the ESP Cipher Mechanism

  As of this writing, there are no known issues which preclude the use
  of the HMAC-MD5-96 algorithm with any specific cipher algorithm.








Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 2403        The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH   November 1998


5.  Security Considerations

  The security provided by HMAC-MD5-96 is based upon the strength of
  HMAC, and to a lesser degree, the strength of MD5. [RFC-2104] claims
  that HMAC does not depend upon the property of strong collision
  resistance, which is important to consider when evaluating the use of
  MD5, an algorithm which has, under recent scrutiny, been shown to be
  much less collision-resistant than was first thought. At the time of
  this writing there are no practical cryptographic attacks against
  HMAC-MD5-96.

  [RFC-2104] states that for "minimally reasonable hash functions" the
  "birthday attack", the strongest attack know against HMAC, is
  impractical. For a 64-byte block hash such as HMAC-MD5-96, an attack
  involving the successful processing of 2**64 blocks would be
  infeasible unless it were discovered that the underlying hash had
  collisions after processing 2**30 blocks. A hash with such weak
  collision-resistance characteristics would generally be considered to
  be unusable.

  It is also important to consider that while MD5 was never developed
  to be used as a keyed hash algorithm, HMAC had that criteria from the
  onset. While the use of MD5 in the context of data security is
  undergoing reevaluation, the combined HMAC with MD5 algorithm has
  held up to cryptographic scrutiny.

  [RFC-2104] also discusses the potential additional security which is
  provided by the truncation of the resulting hash. Specifications
  which include HMAC are strongly encouraged to perform this hash
  truncation.

  As [RFC-2104] provides a framework for incorporating various hash
  algorithms with HMAC, it is possible to replace MD5 with other
  algorithms such as SHA-1. [RFC-2104] contains a detailed discussion
  on the strengths and weaknesses of HMAC algorithms.

  As is true with any cryptographic algorithm, part of its strength
  lies in the correctness of the algorithm implementation, the security
  of the key management mechanism and its implementation, the strength
  of the associated secret key, and upon the correctness of the
  implementation in all of the participating systems.  [RFC-2202]
  contains test vectors and example code to assist in verifying the
  correctness of HMAC-MD5-96 code.








Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 2403        The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH   November 1998


6.  Acknowledgments

  This document is derived in part from previous works by Jim Hughes,
  those people that worked with Jim on the combined DES/CBC+HMAC-MD5
  ESP transforms, the ANX bakeoff participants, and the members of the
  IPsec working group.

  We would also like to thank Hugo Krawczyk for his comments and
  recommendations regarding some of the cryptographic specific text in
  this document.

7.  References

  [RFC-1321]   Rivest, R., "MD5 Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321, April
               1992.

  [RFC-2104]   Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC:
               Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
               February 1997.

  [RFC-1810]   Touch, J., "Report on MD5 Performance", RFC 1810, June
               1995.

  [Bellare96a] Bellare, M., Canetti, R., and H. Krawczyk, "Keying Hash
               Functions for Message Authentication", Advances in
               Cryptography, Crypto96 Proceeding, June 1996.

  [ARCH]       Kent, S., and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for
               the Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.

  [ESP]        Kent, S., and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Security
               Payload", RFC 2406, November 1998.

  [AH]         Kent, S., and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header",
               RFC 2402, November 1998.

  [Thayer97a]  Thayer, R., Doraswamy, N., and R. Glenn, "IP Security
               Document Roadmap", RFC 2411, November 1998.

  [RFC-2202]   Cheng, P., and R. Glenn, "Test Cases for HMAC-MD5 and
               HMAC-SHA-1", RFC 2202, March 1997.

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







Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 2403        The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH   November 1998


8.  Editors' Address

  Cheryl Madson
  Cisco Systems, Inc.

  EMail: [email protected]


  Rob Glenn
  NIST

  EMail: <[email protected]>

The IPsec working group can be contacted through the chairs:

  Robert Moskowitz
  ICSA

  EMail: [email protected]


  Ted T'so
  Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  EMail: [email protected]


























Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 2403        The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP and AH   November 1998


9.  Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998).  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 assigns.

  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.
























Madson & Glenn              Standards Track                     [Page 7]