Mike Jones: self-issued

I’m thrilled that the IETF has restarted the JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) Working Group. It’s chartered to work on JSON- and CBOR-based representations for Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs), selective disclosure enabling minimal disclosure, and non-correlatable presentation. The representations are planned to use the three-party model of Issuer, Holder, and Verifier utilized by Verifiable Credentials.

See the newly approved JOSE charter at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jose/03/. The working group will be chaired by Karen O’Donoghue, John Bradley, and John Mattsson, with the assigned area director being Roman Danyliw.

I believe this is a great outcome because the JOSE working group participants already have expertise creating simple, widely-adopted JSON-based cryptographic formats, such as JSON Web Signature (JWS), JSON Web Encryption (JWE), and JSON Web Key (JWK). The new formats will be peers to JWS, JWE, and COSE, reusing elements that make sense, while enabling use of new cryptographic algorithms whose inputs and outputs are not representable in the existing JOSE and COSE formats.

If you’re interested in the work, please join the JOSE mailing list at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose if you’re not already a member. Also, plan to participate in IETF 116 Yokohama, where we should be able to have the first meeting of the reconstituted working group. I hope to see you there!

As background, the first step in the JOSE rechartering was the JSON Web Proofs (JWP) BoF at IETF 114 in Philadelphia sponsored by Security Area Director Roman Danyliw and chaired by Karen O’Donoghue and John Bradley, during which Jeremie Miller, Kristina Yasuda, Tobias Looker, and I presented. That was follwed by a Virtual Interim JWP BoF in October, 2022, review on the ietf-announce mailing list, and multiple IESG discussions.

All of which brings us back to the (now recurring!) question: “What Would JOSE Do?” Join us and be part of answering it!

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & Events & IETF & JSON & Privacy & Specifications

This week at IETF 114 in Philadelphia, we held a Birds-of-a-Feather (BoF) session on JSON Web Proofs (JWPs). JSON Web Proofs are a JSON-based representation of cryptographic inputs and outputs that enable use of Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs), selective disclosure for minimal disclosure, and non-correlatable presentation. JWPs use the three-party model of Issuer, Holder, and Verifier utilized by Verifiable Credentials.

The BoF asked to reinstate the IETF JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) working group. We asked for this because the JOSE working group participants already have expertise creating simple, widely-adopted JSON-based cryptographic formats, such as JSON Web Signature (JWS), JSON Web Encryption (JWE), and JSON Web Key (JWK). The JWP format would be a peer to JWS and JWE, reusing elements that make sense, while enabling use of new cryptographic algorithms whose inputs and outputs are not representable in the existing JOSE formats.

Presentations given at the BoF were:

• Chair Slides – Karen O’Donoghue and John Bradley
• The need: Standards for selective disclosure and zero-knowledge proofs – Mike Jones
• What Would JOSE Do? Why re-form the JOSE working group to meet the need? – Mike Jones
• The selective disclosure industry landscape, including Verifiable Credentials and ISO Mobile Driver Licenses (mDL) – Kristina Yasuda
• A Look Under the Covers: The JSON Web Proofs specifications – Jeremie Miller
• Beyond JWS: BBS as a new algorithm with advanced capabilities utilizing JWP – Tobias Looker

You can view the BoF minutes at https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-114-jwp. A useful discussion ensued after the presentations. Unfortunately, we didn’t have time to finish the BoF in the one-hour slot. The BoF questions unanswered in the time allotted would have been along the lines of “Is the work appropriate for the IETF?”, “Is there interest in the work?”, and “Do we want to adopt the proposed charter?”. Discussion of those topics is now happening on the jose@ietf.org mailing list. Join it at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose to participate. Roman Danyliw, the Security Area Director who sponsored the BoF, had suggested that we hold a virtual interim BoF to complete the BoF process before IETF 115 in London. Hope to see you there!

The BoF Presenters:

The BoF Participants, including the chairs:

No Comments » Posted under Events & IETF & JSON & Privacy & Specifications

This week, Tobias Looker and I submitted two individual Internet Drafts for consideration by the COSE working group.

The first is “Barreto-Lynn-Scott Elliptic Curve Key Representations for JOSE and COSE“, the abstract of which is:

This specification defines how to represent cryptographic keys for the pairing-friendly elliptic curves known as Barreto-Lynn-Scott (BLS), for use with the key representation formats of JSON Web Key (JWK) and COSE (COSE_Key).

These curves are used in Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) representations for JOSE and COSE, where the ZKPs use the CFRG drafts “Pairing-Friendly Curves” and “BLS Signatures“.

The second is “CBOR Web Token (CWT) Claims in COSE Headers“, the abstract of which is:

This document describes how to include CBOR Web Token (CWT) claims in the header parameters of any COSE structure. This functionality helps to facilitate applications that wish to make use of CBOR Web Token (CWT) claims in encrypted COSE structures and/or COSE structures featuring detached signatures, while having some of those claims be available before decryption and/or without inspecting the detached payload.

JWTs define a mechanism for replicating claims as header parameter values, but CWTs have been missing the equivalent capability to date. The use case is the same as that which motivated Section 5.3 of JWT “Replicating Claims as Header Parameters” – encrypted CWTs for which you’d like to have unencrypted instances of particular claims to determine how to process the CWT prior to decrypting it.

We plan to discuss both with the COSE working group at IETF 113 in Vienna.

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Claims & IETF & JSON & Specifications

The OAuth 2.0 JWT-Secured Authorization Request (JAR) specification has been published as RFC 9101. Among other applications, this specification is used by the OpenID Financial-grade API (FAPI). This is another in the series of RFCs bringing OpenID Connect-defined functionality to OAuth 2.0. Previous such RFCs included “OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol” [RFC 7591] and “OAuth 2.0 Authorization Server Metadata” [RFC 8414].

The abstract of the RFC is:

The authorization request in OAuth 2.0 described in RFC 6749 utilizes query parameter serialization, which means that authorization request parameters are encoded in the URI of the request and sent through user agents such as web browsers. While it is easy to implement, it means that a) the communication through the user agents is not integrity protected and thus, the parameters can be tainted, b) the source of the communication is not authenticated, and c) the communication through the user agents can be monitored. Because of these weaknesses, several attacks to the protocol have now been put forward.

This document introduces the ability to send request parameters in a JSON Web Token (JWT) instead, which allows the request to be signed with JSON Web Signature (JWS) and encrypted with JSON Web Encryption (JWE) so that the integrity, source authentication, and confidentiality properties of the authorization request are attained. The request can be sent by value or by reference.

Thanks to Nat Sakimura and John Bradley for persisting in finishing this RFC!

No Comments » Posted under Claims & IETF & JSON & OAuth & OpenID & Specifications

As described in my last post about OAuth JAR, after it was first sent to the RFC Editor, the IESG requested an additional round of IETF feedback. I’m happy to report that, having addressed this feedback, the spec has now been sent back to the RFC Editor.

As a reminder, this specification takes the JWT Request Object from Section 6 of OpenID Connect Core (Passing Request Parameters as JWTs) and makes this functionality available for pure OAuth 2.0 applications – and does so without introducing breaking changes. This is one of a series of specifications bringing functionality originally developed for OpenID Connect to the OAuth 2.0 ecosystem. Other such specifications included OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol [RFC 7591] and OAuth 2.0 Authorization Server Metadata [RFC 8414].

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-33

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-33.html

No Comments » Posted under Claims & IETF & JSON & OAuth & OpenID & Specifications

After the OAuth 2.0 JWT Secured Authorization Request (JAR) specification was sent to the RFC Editor, the IESG requested an additional round of IETF feedback. We’ve published an updated draft addressing the remaining review comments, specifically, SecDir comments from Watson Ladd. The only normative change made since the 28 was to change the MIME Type from “oauth.authz.req+jwt” to “oauth-authz-req+jwt”, per advice from the designated experts.

As a reminder, this specification takes the JWT Request Object from Section 6 of OpenID Connect Core (Passing Request Parameters as JWTs) and makes this functionality available for pure OAuth 2.0 applications – and does so without introducing breaking changes. This is one of a series of specifications bringing functionality originally developed for OpenID Connect to the OAuth 2.0 ecosystem. Other such specifications included OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol [RFC 7591] and OAuth 2.0 Authorization Server Metadata [RFC 8414].

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-31

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-31.html

No Comments » Posted under Claims & IETF & JSON & OAuth & OpenID & Specifications

Congratulations to Nat Sakimura and John Bradley for progressing the OAuth 2.0 JWT Secured Authorization Request (JAR) specification from the working group through the IESG to the RFC Editor. This specification takes the JWT Request Object from Section 6 of OpenID Connect Core (Passing Request Parameters as JWTs) and makes this functionality available for pure OAuth 2.0 applications – and intentionally does so without introducing breaking changes.

This is one of a series of specifications bringing functionality originally developed for OpenID Connect to the OAuth 2.0 ecosystem. Other such specifications included OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol [RFC 7591] and OAuth 2.0 Authorization Server Metadata [RFC 8414].

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-28

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-28.html

Again, congratulations to Nat and John and the OAuth Working Group for this achievement!

No Comments » Posted under Claims & IETF & JSON & OAuth & OpenID & Specifications

The W3C Web Authentication (WebAuthn) working group and the IETF COSE working group created “CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE) and JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) Registrations for Web Authentication (WebAuthn) Algorithms” to make some algorithms and elliptic curves used by WebAuthn and FIDO2 officially part of COSE and JOSE. The RSA algorithms are used by TPMs. The “secp256k1” curve registered (a.k.a., the Bitcoin curve) is also used in some decentralized identity applications. The completed specification has now been published as RFC 8812.

As described when the registrations recently occurred, the algorithms registered are:

• RS256 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-256 – new for COSE
• RS384 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-384 – new for COSE
• RS512 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-512 – new for COSE
• RS1 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-1 – new for COSE
• ES256K – ECDSA using secp256k1 curve and SHA-256 – new for COSE and JOSE

The elliptic curves registered are:

• secp256k1 – SECG secp256k1 curve – new for COSE and JOSE

See them in the IANA COSE Registry and the IANA JOSE Registry.

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & FIDO & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

I’m pleased to report that the SecEvent delivery specifications are now stable, having been approved by the IESG, and will shortly become RFCs. Specifically, they have now progressed to the RFC Editor queue, meaning that the only remaining step before finalization is editorial due diligence. Thus, implementations can now utilize the draft specifications with confidence that that breaking changes will not occur as they are finalized.

The specifications are available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-secevent-http-push-14
• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-12

HTML-formatted versions are also available at:

• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-secevent-http-push-14.html
• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-12.html

No Comments » Posted under IETF & JSON & Safety & Specifications

We wrote the specification COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms to create and register COSE and JOSE algorithm and elliptic curve identifiers for algorithms used by WebAuthn and CTAP2 that didn’t yet exist. I’m happy to report that all these registrations are now complete and the specification has progressed to the RFC Editor. Thanks to the COSE working group for supporting this work.

Search for WebAuthn in the IANA COSE Registry and the IANA JOSE Registry to see the registrations. These are now stable and can be used by applications, both in the WebAuthn/FIDO2 space and for other application areas, including decentralized identity (where the secp256k1 “bitcoin curve” is in widespread use).

The algorithms registered are:

• RS256 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-256 – new for COSE
• RS384 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-384 – new for COSE
• RS512 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-512 – new for COSE
• RS1 – RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 using SHA-1 – new for COSE
• ES256K – ECDSA using secp256k1 curve and SHA-256 – new for COSE and JOSE

The elliptic curves registered are:

• secp256k1 – SECG secp256k1 curve – new for COSE and JOSE

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & FIDO & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

IANA has registered the “secp256k1” elliptic curve in the JSON Web Key Elliptic Curve registry and the corresponding “ES256K” signing algorithm in the JSON Web Signature and Encryption Algorithms registry. This curve is widely used among blockchain and decentralized identity implementations.

The registrations were specified by the COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms specification, which was created by the W3C Web Authentication working group and the IETF COSE working group because WebAuthn also allows the use of secp256k1. This specification is now in IETF Last Call. The corresponding COSE registrations will occur after the specification becomes an RFC.

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & FIDO & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

This week we published updates to two IETF specifications that support the WebAuthn/FIDO2 ecosystem, as well as other uses, such as decentralized identity.

One is COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms. It registers algorithm and elliptic curve identifiers for algorithms used by WebAuthn and FIDO2. The “secp256k1” curve being registered is also used for signing in some decentralized identity applications. The specification has completed the Area Director review and has been submitted to the IESG for publication.

The other is Registries for Web Authentication (WebAuthn). This creates IANA registries enabling multiple kinds of extensions to W3C Web Authentication (WebAuthn) implementations to be registered. This specification has completed IETF last call and is scheduled for review by the IESG.

Thanks to the COSE working group for their adoption of the algorithms specification, and to Ivaylo Petrov and Murray Kucherawy for their reviews of it. Thanks to Kathleen Moriarty and Benjamin Kaduk for their Area Director sponsorships of the registries specification and to Jeff Hodges for being primary author of it.

The specifications are available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hodges-webauthn-registries-07
• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-06

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & FIDO & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

The JSON Web Token Best Current Practices specification is now RFC 8725 and BCP 225. The abstract of the specification is:

JSON Web Tokens, also known as JWTs, are URL-safe JSON-based security tokens that contain a set of claims that can be signed and/or encrypted. JWTs are being widely used and deployed as a simple security token format in numerous protocols and applications, both in the area of digital identity and in other application areas. This Best Current Practices document updates RFC 7519 to provide actionable guidance leading to secure implementation and deployment of JWTs.

The JSON Web Token (JWT) specification [RFC 7519] was approved in May 2015, almost five years ago, and has been in production use since at least 2013. This Best Current Practices specification contains a compendium of lessons learned from real JWT deployments and implementations over that period. It describes pitfalls and how to avoid them as well as new recommended practices that enable proactively avoiding problems that could otherwise arise. Importantly, the BCP introduces no breaking changes to the JWT specification and does not require changes to existing deployments.

The BCP came about as JWTs were starting to be used in new families of protocols and applications, both in the IETF and by others. For instance, JWTs are being used by the IETF STIR working group to enable verification of the calling party’s authorization to use a particular telephone number for an incoming call, providing verified Caller ID to help combat fraudulent and unwanted telephone calls. The advice in the BCP can be used by new JWT profiles and applications to take advantage of what’s been learned since we created the JSON Web Token (JWT) specification over a half decade ago.

No Comments » Posted under Claims & Cryptography & IETF & JSON & OAuth & Specifications

The “COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms” specification has been updated to add explanatory comments on design decisions made that were discussed on the mailing list that Jim Schaad requested be added to the draft.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-04

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-04.html

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & FIDO & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

The Poll-Based Security Event Token (SET) Delivery specification has been updated to address Working Group Last Call (WGLC) and Document Shepherd comments received. Thanks to Annabelle Backman for the useful WGLC comments and to Yaron Sheffer for the useful Shepherd comments. This update is intended to enable our area director Benjamin Kaduk to review both the Push and Poll delivery method specifications at the same time.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-05

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• https://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-05.html

No Comments » Posted under IETF & JSON & Specifications

The “COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms” specification has been updated to address working group last call (WGLC) feedback received. Thanks to J.C. Jones, Kevin Jacobs, Jim Schaad, Neil Madden, and Benjamin Kaduk for their useful reviews.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-02

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-02.html

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & FIDO & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

I’m pleased to report that the JSON Web Token (JWT) Best Current Practices (BCP) specification is now technically stable and will shortly be an RFC – an Internet standard. Specifically, it has now progressed to the RFC Editor queue, meaning that the only remaining step before finalization is editorial due diligence. Thus, implementations can now utilize the draft specification with confidence that that breaking changes will not occur as it is finalized.

The abstract of the specification is:

JSON Web Tokens, also known as JWTs, are URL-safe JSON-based security tokens that contain a set of claims that can be signed and/or encrypted. JWTs are being widely used and deployed as a simple security token format in numerous protocols and applications, both in the area of digital identity, and in other application areas. The goal of this Best Current Practices document is to provide actionable guidance leading to secure implementation and deployment of JWTs.

Thanks to the OAuth working group for completing this important specification.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp-07

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bcp-07.html

No Comments » Posted under Claims & Cryptography & IETF & JSON & OAuth & Specifications

I’m very pleased to report that the OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange specification is now technically stable and will shortly be an RFC – an Internet standard. Specifically, it has now progressed to the RFC Editor queue, meaning that the only remaining step before finalization is editorial due diligence. Thus, implementations can now utilize the draft specification with confidence that that breaking changes will not occur as it is finalized.

The abstract of the specification is:

This specification defines a protocol for an HTTP- and JSON-based Security Token Service (STS) by defining how to request and obtain security tokens from OAuth 2.0 authorization servers, including security tokens employing impersonation and delegation.

Thanks to the OAuth working group for completing this important specification. And thanks to Brian Campbell for taking point in making the recent updates to get us here.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-19

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-19.html

No Comments » Posted under Claims & IETF & JSON & OAuth & Specifications

The “COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms” specification has been updated to address feedback received since working group adoption. The one breaking change is changing the secp256k1 curve identifier for JOSE from “P-256K” to “secp256k1”, for reasons described by John Mattsson. The draft now also specifies that the SHA-256 hash function is to be used with “ES256K” signatures – a clarification due to Matt Palmer.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-01

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-01.html

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C

I’m pleased to report that the IETF COSE Working Group has adopted the specification “COSE and JOSE Registrations for WebAuthn Algorithms”. An abstract of what it does is:

This specification defines how to use several algorithms with COSE [RFC8152] that are used by implementations of the W3C Web Authentication (WebAuthn) [WebAuthn] and FIDO2 Client to Authenticator Protocol (CTAP) [CTAP] specifications. These algorithms are to be registered in the IANA “COSE Algorithms” registry [IANA.COSE.Algorithms] and also in the IANA “JSON Web Signature and Encryption Algorithms” registry [IANA.JOSE.Algorithms], when not already registered there.

The algorithms registered are RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 with four different hash functions and signing with the secp256k1 curve. Note that there was consensus in the working group meeting not to work on registrations for the Elliptic Curve Direct Anonymous Attestation (ECDAA) algorithms “ED256” and “ED512”, both because of issues that have been raised with them and because they are not in widespread use.

The -01 version will address the review comments received on the mailing list from Jim Schaad and John Mattsson.

The specification is available at:

• https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-00

An HTML-formatted version is also available at:

• http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-cose-webauthn-algorithms-00.html

No Comments » Posted under CBOR & Cryptography & IETF & JSON & Specifications & W3C