Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track March 2011 ISSN:

Similar documents
Category: Experimental March 2010 ISSN: Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Transactions

Category: Standards Track June 2006

Category: Standards Track June Requesting Attributes by Object Class in the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Status of This Memo

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track. Cisco May 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 5280 May 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track ISSN: March 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational. August Using Trust Anchor Constraints during Certification Path Processing

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5917 Category: Informational June 2010 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Obsoletes: 2831 July 2011 Category: Informational ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6522 STD: 73 January 2012 Obsoletes: 3462 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) October This document establishes an IETF URN Sub-namespace for use with OAuth-related specifications.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6440 Category: Standards Track. Huawei December 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 4326 June 2014 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational. June A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for CableLabs

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 5451 March 2012 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track. July 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: March 2016

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7725 Category: Standards Track February 2016 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8142 Category: Standards Track April 2017 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7237 Category: Informational June 2014 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track October 2015 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track ISSN: July 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7809 Updates: 4791 March 2016 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational March 2016 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. March 2017

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd July Rebind Capability in DHCPv6 Reconfigure Messages

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: Y. Umaoka IBM December 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: July 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8069 Category: Informational February 2017 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Best Current Practice ISSN: March 2017

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: March 2018

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) June Network Time Protocol (NTP) Server Option for DHCPv6

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. M. Petit-Huguenin Impedance Mismatch November 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8516 Category: Standards Track January 2019 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: August 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5736 Category: Informational. ICANN January 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track May 2011 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. February 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6961 June 2013 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6694 August 2012 Category: Informational ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8035 Updates: 5761 November 2016 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) BCP: 183 May 2013 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Experimental Helsinki Institute for Information Technology ISSN: May 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: November 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8336 Category: Standards Track. March 2018

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6379 Obsoletes: 4869 Category: Informational October 2011 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 6376 January 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7319 BCP: 191 July 2014 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8440 Category: Standards Track ISSN: August 2018

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 2474 August 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5756

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track ISSN: September 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6034 Category: Standards Track October 2010 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track April 2011 ISSN:

Category: Experimental June 2006

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. Enterprise Architects February 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7189 Category: Standards Track March 2014 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6061 Category: Informational January 2011 ISSN:

Request for Comments: 7314 Category: Experimental July 2014 ISSN: Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS) EXPIRE Option.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track March 2015 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational. May IEEE Information Element for the IETF

Clarifications for When to Use the name-addr Production in SIP Messages

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6441 BCP: 171 November 2011 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN:

Moving the Undeployed TCP Extensions RFC 1072, RFC 1106, RFC 1110, RFC 1145, RFC 1146, RFC 1379, RFC 1644, and RFC 1693 to Historic Status.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6490 Category: Standards Track. G. Michaelson APNIC. S. Kent BBN February 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6028 Category: Experimental ISSN: October 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: November 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. February 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8437 Updates: 3501 August 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational. August IANA Registration for the Cryptographic Algorithm Object Identifier Range

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational March 2017 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track ISSN: January 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7192 Category: Standards Track April 2014 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8186 Category: Standards Track. June 2017

Expires in six months 24 October 2004 Obsoletes: RFC , , 3377, 3771

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7403 Category: Standards Track November 2014 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6818 Updates: 5280 January 2013 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: January 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8441 Updates: 6455 September 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5754 Updates: 3370 January 2010 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: October 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) ISSN: April 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6160 Category: Standards Track April 2011 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Huawei Technologies November 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. M. Nottingham, Ed. Akamai April 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: August 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7017 Category: Informational August 2013 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5725 Category: Standards Track ISSN: February 2010

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) April Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA) for DNSSEC

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5983 Category: Experimental October 2010 ISSN:

D. Crocker, Ed. Updates: RFC4871 June 10, 2009 (if approved) Intended status: Standards Track Expires: December 12, 2009

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) ISSN: April 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 5322 March 2013 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track ISSN: July 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) P. Jones Cisco Systems November Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Uniform Resource Identifiers

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8297 Category: Experimental December 2017 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7213 Category: Standards Track. M. Bocci Alcatel-Lucent June 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6939 Category: Standards Track. May 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6725 Category: Standards Track August 2012 ISSN:

Transcription:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. Zeilenga Request for Comments: 6171 Isode Limited Category: Standards Track March 2011 ISSN: 2070-1721 The Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Don t Use Copy Control Abstract This document defines the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Don t Use Copy control extension, which allows a client to specify that copied information should not be used in providing service. This control is based upon the X.511 dontusecopy service control option. 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 in Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6171. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 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. Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 1]

This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English. 1. Background and Intended Usage This document defines the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [RFC4510] Don t Use Copy control extension. The control may be attached to request messages to indicate that copied (replicated or cached) information [X.500] is not be used in providing service. This control is based upon the X.511 [X.511] dontusecopy service control option. The Don t Use Copy control is intended to be used where the client requires the service be provided using original (master) information [X.500]. In absence of this control, the server is free to make use of copied (i.e., non-authoritative) information in providing the requested service. For instance, a client might desire to have an authoritative answer to a question of whether or not a particular user is a member of a group. To ask this question of a server, the client might issue a compare request [RFC4511], with the Don t Use Copy control, where the entry parameter is the Distinguished Name (DN) of the group, the ava.attributedesc is member, and the ava.assertionvalue is the DN of the user in question. If the server has access to the original (master) information directly or through chaining, it performs the operation against the original (master) information and returns comparetrue or comparefalse (or an error). If the server does not have access to the original information, the server is obligated to either return a referral or an error. It is not intended that this control be used generally (e.g., for all LDAP interrogation operations) but only as required to ensure proper directory application behavior. In general, directory applications ought to designed to use copied information well. Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 2]

2. Terminology DSA stands for Directory System Agent (or server). DSE stands for DSA-Specific Entry. 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 [RFC2119]. 3. The Don t Use Copy Control The Don t Use Copy control is an LDAP Control [RFC4511] whose controltype is 1.3.6.1.1.22 and controlvalue is absent. The criticality MUST be TRUE. There is no corresponding response control. The control is appropriate for LDAP interrogation operations, including Compare and Search operations [RFC4511]. It is inappropriate for all other operations, including Abandon, Bind, Delete, Modify, ModifyDN, StartTLS, and Unbind operations [RFC4511]. When the control is attached to an LDAP request, the requested operation MUST NOT be performed on copied information. That is, the requested operation MUST be performed on original information. If original (master) information for the target or base object of the operation is not available (either locally or through chaining), the server MUST either return a referral directing the client to a server believed to be better able to service the request or return an appropriate result code (e.g., unwillingtoperform). It is noted that a referral, if returned, is not necessarily to the server holding the original (master) information. It is also noted that an authoritative answer to the question might not be available to the client for any number of reasons. Where the client chases a referral to a server (as referenced by an LDAP URL) in the server response in order to obtain an authoritative response, the client MUST provide the dontusecopy control with the interrogation request it makes to the referred to server. While LDAP allows return of other kinds of URIs, the syntax and semantics of other kinds of URIs are left to future specifications. The particulars of how to act upon other kinds of URIs are also left to future specifications. Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 3]

Servers implementing this technical specification SHOULD publish the object identifier 1.3.6.1.1.22 as a value of the supportedcontrol attribute [RFC4512] in their root DSE. A server MAY choose to advertise this extension only when the client is authorized to use it. 4. Security Considerations This control is intended to be provided where providing service using copied information might lead to unexpected application behavior. Use of the Don t Use Copy control may permit an attacker to perform or amplify a denial-of-service attack by causing additional server resources to be employed, such as when the server chooses to chain the request instead of returning a referral. Servers capable of such chaining can mitigate this threat by limiting chaining to a particular group of authenticated entities. LDAP is frequently used for storage and distribution of securitysensitive information, including access control and security policy information. Failure to use the Don t Use Copy control may thus permit an attacker to gain unauthorized access by allowing reliance on stale data. 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. Object Identifier IANA has assigned an LDAP Object Identifier [RFC4520] to identify the LDAP Don t Use Copy Control defined in this document. Subject: Request for LDAP Object Identifier Registration Person & email address to contact for further information: Kurt Zeilenga <Kurt.Zeilenga@Isode.COM> Specification: RFC 6171 Author/Change Controller: IESG Comments: Identifies the LDAP Don t Use Copy Control Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 4]

5.2. LDAP Protocol Mechanism IANA has registered this protocol mechanism [RFC4520] as follows. Subject: Request for LDAP Protocol Mechanism Registration Object Identifier: 1.3.6.1.1.22 Description: Don t Use Copy Control Person & email address to contact for further information: Kurt Zeilenga <Kurt.Zeilenga@Isode.COM> Usage: Control Specification: RFC 6171 Author/Change Controller: IESG Comments: none 6. Acknowledgements The author thanks Ben Campbell, Phillip Hallam-Baker, and Ted Hardie for providing review and specific suggestions. 7. References 7.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC4510] Zeilenga, K., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP): Technical Specification Road Map", RFC 4510, June 2006. [RFC4511] Sermersheim, J., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP): The Protocol", RFC 4511, June 2006. [RFC4512] Zeilenga, K., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP): Directory Information Models", RFC 4512, June 2006. 7.2. Informative References [X.500] [X.511] International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The Directory -- Overview of concepts, models and services," X.500(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-1:1994). International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The Directory: Abstract Service Definition", X.511(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-3:1993). Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 5]

[RFC4520] Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Considerations for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)", BCP 64, RFC 4520, June 2006. Author s Address Kurt D. Zeilenga Isode Limited EMail: Kurt.Zeilenga@Isode.COM Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 6]