<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.35 (Ruby 3.2.3) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-hmac-sha2-01" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" obsoletes="2747 3097" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.33.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="RSVP HMAC-SHA2">RSVP Cryptographic Authentication with HMAC-SHA2</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-hmac-sha2-01"/>
    <author initials="R." surname="Atkinson" fullname="Ran Atkinson">
      <organization>Consultant</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>rja.lists@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="J." surname="Halpern" fullname="Joel Halpern">
      <organization>Consultant</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>jmh@joelhalpern.org</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2026" month="April" day="28"/>
    <workgroup>TEAS Working Group</workgroup>
    <abstract>
      <?line 79?>

<t>This document specifies the use of the US NIST Secure Hash Standard in
the Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) mode with RSVP
Cryptographic Authentication version 2.  Along with
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2, this document obsoletes RFC2747 and
RFC3097.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 87?>

<section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>This document specifies the use of the US NIST Secure Hash Standard in
the Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) mode with RSVP
Cryptographic Authentication version 2.</t>
      <t>Those secure hash algorithms are defined in the US NIST Secure Hash
Standard (SHS) <xref target="NIST-SHS"/>. <xref target="NIST-HMAC"/> specifies multiple
cryptographic hash functions, including SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512.
The Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) authentication mode is
defined in <xref target="NIST-HMAC"/> and <xref target="RFC2104"/>.</t>
      <t>While it is believed that <xref target="RFC2104"/> is mathematically identical to
<xref target="NIST-HMAC"/> and it is also believed that algorithms in <xref target="RFC6234"/>
are mathematically identical to <xref target="NIST-SHS"/>, in the event of any
confusion or discrepancies the NIST specifications are correct and are
normative and canonical.</t>
      <t>This addition to RSVP Cryptographic Authentication was driven by
operator requests that they be able to use algorithms from the NIST
Secure Hash Standard in the NIST HMAC mode for RSVP Cryptographic
Authentication, instead of being forced to use the much older
Keyed-MD5 algorithm and mode as originally defined for RSVP
Cryptographic Authentication.<xref target="RFC2747"/><xref target="RFC3097"/> As of the date
of publication, the Keyed MD5 construction is widely believed not to
have sufficient cryptographic strength.<xref target="RFC6151"/></t>
      <section anchor="requirements-language">
        <name>Requirements Language</name>
        <t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
        <?line -18?>

</section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="background">
      <name>Background</name>
      <t>All RSVP protocol exchanges can be authenticated using the revised
mechanism defined in draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.  That
specification is carefully written to be independent both of the
cryptographic algorithm and the cryptographic mode.  This approach
means that additional cryptographic modes and cryptographic algorithms
can be defined in the future without needing to change the RSVP
Authentication specification of draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.</t>
      <t>This document specifies the use of NIST SHS algorithms with the HMAC
mode for use with draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.  In the future,
other documents might be specified for other cryptographic algorithms
with this or another cryptographic mode.</t>
      <t>The combination of a cryptographic mode (e.g., HMAC) with a specific
cryptographic algorithm (e.g., SHA256) is known as a "Cryptographic
Transform" (e.g., HMAC-SHA256).</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="cryptographic-authentication-with-nist-shs-in-hmac-mode">
      <name>Cryptographic Authentication with NIST SHS in HMAC Mode</name>
      <t>When using this authentication method, a shared secret Cryptographic
Key, the cryptographic mode and algorithm (e.g., HMAC-SHA256), and its
associated Key Identifier are configured in the router.  For each RSVP
protocol packet, that secret key is used to generate/verify a "message
digest" that is placed in the Authentication Data field of the RSVP
INTEGRITY object.  The message digest is a one-way function of the
RSVP protocol packet and the secret key.  Since the secret key is
never sent over the network in the clear, protection is provided
against passive attacks <xref target="RFC1704"/>.</t>
      <t>This specification discusses the computation of the Authentication
Data field of the RSVP INTEGRITY object when one of the NIST SHS
family of algorithms is used in the Hashed Message Authentication Code
(HMAC) mode.</t>
      <t>With the additions in this document, the currently valid Cryptographic
Transforms for use with RSVP Cryptographic Authentication include:</t>
      <artwork><![CDATA[
       TRANSFORM NAME          SPECIFICATION(S)

       Keyed-MD5               {{RFC2747}} and {{RFC3097}}
       HMAC-SHA-256            (defined here)
       HMAC-SHA-384            (defined here)
       HMAC-SHA-512            (defined here)
]]></artwork>
      <t>Of the above, all implementations of this specification <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support
at least both:</t>
      <artwork><![CDATA[
       HMAC-SHA-256
       HMAC-SHA-512
]]></artwork>
      <t>and <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> (for backwards compatibility with existing implementations
and deployments of RSVP Cryptographic Authentication) include support
for:</t>
      <artwork><![CDATA[
       Keyed-MD5
]]></artwork>
      <t>and <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> include support for:</t>
      <artwork><![CDATA[
       HMAC-SHA-384

  NOTE WELL: This document deliberately does not specify a
  Cryptographic Transform using either SHA-1 or SHA-224 because
  those algorithms are considered to be too weak as of this
  document's publication date.
]]></artwork>
      <t>An implementation of this specification <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> allow network operators
to configure ANY RSVP Cryptographic Transform supported by that
implementation for use with ANY given RSVP Security Association (and
with its corresponding Key Identifier value) that is configured into
that router.</t>
      <section anchor="generating-cryptographic-authentication">
        <name>Generating Cryptographic Authentication</name>
        <t>First, following the procedure defined in
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2, select the appropriate RSVP Security
Association for use with this packet and set the Key Identifier field
to the Key Identifier value of that RSVP Security Association.</t>
        <t>Second, add an RSVP INTEGRITY object to the outgoing RSVP packet if
one does not yet exist, taking care to size the Authentication Data
field appropriately for the Cryptographic Algorithm specified in that
RSVP Security Association.  Using the appropriate RSVP Security
Association, set the Flags field, set the AAL field to the appropriate
value for the Cryptographic Algorithm that will be used, set the Key
Identifier, and set the Sequence Number.  The Authentication Data
field is filled with the fixed value of "Apad", which is defined in
the next section.</t>
        <t>When any NIST SHS algorithm is used in HMAC mode with RSVP
Cryptographic Authentication, the Authentication Data Length is equal
to the normal hash output length (measured in bytes) for the specific
NIST SHS algorithm in use.</t>
        <table>
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="left">Cryptographic Transform</th>
              <th align="left">AAL Field value</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">HMAC-SHA256</td>
              <td align="left">4</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">HMAC-SHA384</td>
              <td align="left">8</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">HMAC-SHA512</td>
              <td align="left">12</td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
        <t>Third, the Sequence Number of the RSVP INTEGRITY object is set
following the procedures in draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.</t>
        <t>Fourth, the authentication data is calculated, as described below.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="cryptographic-aspects">
        <name>Cryptographic Aspects</name>
        <t>This describes the computation of the Authentication Data value
   when the HMAC cryptographic mode is combined with any NIST SHS
   algorithm is used with RSVP Cryptographic Authentication.</t>
        <t>The value of Apad selected is arbitrary.  The only goal was to pick
   a different value of Apad than is in use with other IETF routing or
   control protocols.</t>
        <t>In the algorithm description below, the following nomenclature, which
   is consistent with <xref target="NIST-HMAC"/>, is used:</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
  H    is the specific hashing algorithm (e.g., SHA-256).

  K    is the Authentication Key for the RSVP Security
       Association.

  Ko   is the cryptographic key used with the hash algorithm.

  B    is the block size of H, measured in octets
       rather than bits.  Note well that B is the
       internal block size, not the hash size.

          For SHA-256: B == 64
          For SHA-384 and SHA-512: B == 128

  L    is the length of the hash, measured in octets
       rather than bits.

  XOR  is the exclusive-or operation.

  Opad is the hexadecimal value 0x5c repeated B times.

  Ipad is the hexadecimal value 0x36 repeated B times.

  Apad is the hexadecimal value 0x7865FE3E repeated (L/4) times.

  Implementation Notes:
     This definition of Apad means that Apad is always the same
     length as the hash output.

     The Authentication Data field length for SHA256 is 32 bytes,
     for SHA384 is 48 bytes, and for SHA512 is 64 bytes.  As a
     side effect, RSVP packets containing the RSVP INTEGRITY
     object will be larger when hash functions with larger hash
     output sizes are used.
]]></artwork>
        <t>(1) PREPARATION OF KEY
       In this application, Ko is always L octets long.</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
   If the Authentication Key (K) is L octets long, then Ko is equal
   to K.  If the Authentication Key (K) is more than L octets long,
   then Ko is set to H(K).  If the Authentication Key (K) is less
   than L octets long, then Ko is set to the Authentication Key (K)
   with zeros appended to the end of the Authentication Key (K),
   such that Ko is L octets long.
]]></artwork>
        <t>(2) FIRST-HASH
       First, the RSVP INTEGRITY object's Authentication Data field
       is filled with the value Apad.</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
   Then, a First-Hash, also known as the inner hash, is computed as
   follows:

         First-Hash = H(Ko XOR Ipad || (RSVP Packet))

   The definition of Apad (above) ensures the inner hash is always the
   same length as the hash output.  
]]></artwork>
        <t>(3) SECOND-HASH
       Then a Second-Hash, also known as the outer hash, is computed as
       follows:</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
         Second-Hash = H(Ko XOR Opad || First-Hash)
]]></artwork>
        <t>(4) RESULT
       The resulting Second-Hash becomes the Authentication Data that is
       sent in the Authentication Data field of the RSVP Integrity Object.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="message-verification">
        <name>Message Verification</name>
        <t>Message verification follows the procedure defined in
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2, except that the cryptographic
calculation of the message digest follows the procedure in
Cryptographic Considerations above when any NIST SHS algorithm in the
HMAC mode is in use.  The KeyID of the received RSVP packet is used to
help locate the correct RSVP Security Association to use.</t>
        <t>Implementation Note:
      One must save the received digest value before calculating the
      expected digest value, so that after that calculation the received
      value can be compared with the expected value to determine whether
      to accept that RSVP packet.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="smooth-key-rollover">
        <name>Smooth Key Rollover</name>
        <t>The Key Identifier field of the RSVP INTEGRITY object enables smooth
key rollover in operational deployments.  Based on the lifetime of the
current RSVP Security Association, both sender and receiver will know
when to switch to a different RSVP Security Association and will do so
at the same time.</t>
        <t>Both draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2 and this document require that all
implementations <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support more than one RSVP Security Association
at any given time, because this also is needed to enable smooth key
rollover.  Implementations <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> support many more than two
concurrent RSVP Security Associations as that can greatly simplify
operational security management.  Additional discussion of this is in
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.</t>
        <t>After changing the active RSVP Security Association, the RSVP sender
will use the (different) Key Identifier value associated with the
newly active RSVP Security Association.  The receiver will use this
new Key Identifier to select the appropriate (new) RSVP Security
Association to use with the received RSVP packet whose INTEGRITY
object contains the new Key Identifier value.</t>
        <t>Additional discussion of smooth key rollover can be found in
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.</t>
        <t>Because the Key Identifier field is present, the receiver does not
need to (and implementations of this specification <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>) try all
configured RSVP Security Associations with any received RSVP packet.
This requirement mitigates some of the risks of a Denial-of-Service
(DoS) attack on the RSVP instance, but does not entirely prevent all
conceivable DoS attacks.  For example, an on-link adversary still
could generate RSVP packets that are syntactically valid but that
contain invalid Authentication Data, thereby forcing the receiver(s)
to perform expensive cryptographic computations to discover that the
packets are invalid.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>This document enhances the security of the RSVP signaling protocol by
specifying support for the algorithms defined in the NIST Secure Hash
Standard (SHS) using the Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC)
mode.</t>
      <t>The value Apad is used here primarily for consistency with IETF
specifications for HMAC-SHA authentication of RIPv2 SHA <xref target="RFC4822"/> and
IS-IS SHA <xref target="RFC5310"/>.  The value of Apad chosen is arbitrary, other
than being different from the value used with RIPv2, OSPFv2, or IS-IS
authentication.</t>
      <t>The quality of the security provided by the Cryptographic
Authentication option depends completely on the strength of the
cryptographic algorithm and cryptographic mode in use, the strength of
the key being used, and the correct implementation of the
authentication mechanism in all communicating RSVP implementations.
Accordingly, the use of high assurance development methods is
recommended.  Security of a deployment of RSVP Authentication also
requires that all parties maintain the secrecy of the shared secret
key.  <xref target="RFC4086"/> and <xref target="NIST-ENTROPY"/> provide guidance on methods for
generating cryptographically random bits.</t>
      <t>Because the RSVP protocol contains information that need not be kept
confidential, privacy is not a requirement.  This mechanism
significantly increases the work an adversary would need to undertake
to inject false information into the RSVP protocol deployment, while
remaining practical to deploy.</t>
      <t>If the RSVP Security Association is not rekeyed frequently enough,
then this mechanism is vulnerable to a replay attack by any on-link
node.  An on-link node could record a legitimate RSVP packet sent on
the link, then replay that packet at the next time the recorded RSVP
packet's sequence number is valid.</t>
      <t>To prevent this replay attack, operators ought to rekey the RSVP
session prior to the sequence number repeating. For additional
discussion, please read draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2.</t>
      <t>The replay attack also might be prevented by using
link-encryption.<xref target="IEEE-802.1AE-2018"/></t>
      <t>Operators also should note that an upper-layer authentication
mechanism, such as this specification, cannot prevent an attack on the
lower layers.  Operators should consider deployment of link-layer
encryption, such as <xref target="IEEE-802.1AE-2018"/>, to protect not only the
link-layer but also as additional protection for the upper-layers.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>IANA is requested to add the following entries to the RSVP
Cryptographic Transforms registry created in
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-auth-v2:</t>
      <artwork><![CDATA[
  TRANSFORM     SPECIFICATION           IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

   HMAC-256     (this document)         MUST implement
   HMAC-384     (this document)         MAY  implement
   HMAC-512     (this document)         MUST implement
]]></artwork>
    </section>
    <section anchor="acknowledgements">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>The authors would like to thank TBD for review of this document.</t>
      <t>TBD (in alphabetical order by last name) provided feedback on
   earlier versions of this document.  That feedback has greatly
   improved both the technical content and the readability of the
   current document.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-combined-references">
      <name>References</name>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
            <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
            <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="NIST-SHS" target="https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/180-4/upd1/final">
          <front>
            <title>Secure Hash Standard (SHS)</title>
            <author>
              <organization>(US) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)</organization>
            </author>
            <date year="2015" month="August"/>
          </front>
          <annotation>Federal Information Processing Standard 180-4</annotation>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="NIST-HMAC" target="https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/198-1/final">
          <front>
            <title>The Keyed-Hash Message Authentication Code (HMAC)</title>
            <author>
              <organization>(US) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)</organization>
            </author>
            <date year="2008" month="July"/>
          </front>
          <annotation>Federal Information Processing Standard 198-1</annotation>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC1704" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1704" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.1704.xml">
          <front>
            <title>On Internet Authentication</title>
            <author fullname="N. Haller" initials="N." surname="Haller"/>
            <author fullname="R. Atkinson" initials="R." surname="Atkinson"/>
            <date month="October" year="1994"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes a spectrum of authentication technologies and provides suggestions to protocol developers on what kinds of authentication might be suitable for some kinds of protocols and applications used in the Internet. This document provides information for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="1704"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC1704"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2104" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2104" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2104.xml">
          <front>
            <title>HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication</title>
            <author fullname="H. Krawczyk" initials="H." surname="Krawczyk"/>
            <author fullname="M. Bellare" initials="M." surname="Bellare"/>
            <author fullname="R. Canetti" initials="R." surname="Canetti"/>
            <date month="February" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes HMAC, a mechanism for message authentication using cryptographic hash functions. HMAC can be used with any iterative cryptographic hash function, e.g., MD5, SHA-1, in combination with a secret shared key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the properties of the underlying hash function. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2104"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2104"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2747" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2747" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2747.xml">
          <front>
            <title>RSVP Cryptographic Authentication</title>
            <author fullname="F. Baker" initials="F." surname="Baker"/>
            <author fullname="B. Lindell" initials="B." surname="Lindell"/>
            <author fullname="M. Talwar" initials="M." surname="Talwar"/>
            <date month="January" year="2000"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes the format and use of RSVP's INTEGRITY object to provide hop-by-hop integrity and authentication of RSVP messages. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2747"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2747"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC3097" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3097" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3097.xml">
          <front>
            <title>RSVP Cryptographic Authentication -- Updated Message Type Value</title>
            <author fullname="R. Braden" initials="R." surname="Braden"/>
            <author fullname="L. Zhang" initials="L." surname="Zhang"/>
            <date month="April" year="2001"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This memo resolves a duplication in the assignment of RSVP Message Types, by changing the Message Types assigned by RFC 2747 to Challenge and Integrity Response messages. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3097"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3097"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC4086" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4086" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4086.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Randomness Requirements for Security</title>
            <author fullname="D. Eastlake 3rd" initials="D." surname="Eastlake 3rd"/>
            <author fullname="J. Schiller" initials="J." surname="Schiller"/>
            <author fullname="S. Crocker" initials="S." surname="Crocker"/>
            <date month="June" year="2005"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Security systems are built on strong cryptographic algorithms that foil pattern analysis attempts. However, the security of these systems is dependent on generating secret quantities for passwords, cryptographic keys, and similar quantities. The use of pseudo-random processes to generate secret quantities can result in pseudo-security. A sophisticated attacker may find it easier to reproduce the environment that produced the secret quantities and to search the resulting small set of possibilities than to locate the quantities in the whole of the potential number space.</t>
              <t>Choosing random quantities to foil a resourceful and motivated adversary is surprisingly difficult. This document points out many pitfalls in using poor entropy sources or traditional pseudo-random number generation techniques for generating such quantities. It recommends the use of truly random hardware techniques and shows that the existing hardware on many systems can be used for this purpose. It provides suggestions to ameliorate the problem when a hardware solution is not available, and it gives examples of how large such quantities need to be for some applications. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="106"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4086"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4086"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC4822" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4822" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4822.xml">
          <front>
            <title>RIPv2 Cryptographic Authentication</title>
            <author fullname="R. Atkinson" initials="R." surname="Atkinson"/>
            <author fullname="M. Fanto" initials="M." surname="Fanto"/>
            <date month="February" year="2007"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This note describes a revision to the RIPv2 Cryptographic Authentication mechanism originally specified in RFC 2082. This document obsoletes RFC 2082 and updates RFC 2453. This document adds details of how the SHA family of hash algorithms can be used with RIPv2 Cryptographic Authentication, whereas the original document only specified the use of Keyed-MD5. Also, this document clarifies a potential issue with an active attack on this mechanism and adds significant text to the Security Considerations section. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4822"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4822"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC5310" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5310" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5310.xml">
          <front>
            <title>IS-IS Generic Cryptographic Authentication</title>
            <author fullname="M. Bhatia" initials="M." surname="Bhatia"/>
            <author fullname="V. Manral" initials="V." surname="Manral"/>
            <author fullname="T. Li" initials="T." surname="Li"/>
            <author fullname="R. Atkinson" initials="R." surname="Atkinson"/>
            <author fullname="R. White" initials="R." surname="White"/>
            <author fullname="M. Fanto" initials="M." surname="Fanto"/>
            <date month="February" year="2009"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document proposes an extension to Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) to allow the use of any cryptographic authentication algorithm in addition to the already-documented authentication schemes, described in the base specification and RFC 5304. IS-IS is specified in International Standards Organization (ISO) 10589, with extensions to support Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) described in RFC 1195.</t>
              <t>Although this document has been written specifically for using the Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) construct along with the Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA) family of cryptographic hash functions, the method described in this document is generic and can be used to extend IS-IS to support any cryptographic hash function in the future. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5310"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5310"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6151" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6151.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Updated Security Considerations for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms</title>
            <author fullname="S. Turner" initials="S." surname="Turner"/>
            <author fullname="L. Chen" initials="L." surname="Chen"/>
            <date month="March" year="2011"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document updates the security considerations for the MD5 message digest algorithm. It also updates the security considerations for HMAC-MD5. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6151"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6151"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6234" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6234" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6234.xml">
          <front>
            <title>US Secure Hash Algorithms (SHA and SHA-based HMAC and HKDF)</title>
            <author fullname="D. Eastlake 3rd" initials="D." surname="Eastlake 3rd"/>
            <author fullname="T. Hansen" initials="T." surname="Hansen"/>
            <date month="May" year="2011"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Federal Information Processing Standard, FIPS</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6234"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6234"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="IEEE-802.1AE-2018" target="https://standards.ieee.org/IEEE/802.1AE/7154/">
          <front>
            <title>IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Media Access Control (MAC) Security</title>
            <author>
              <organization>Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)</organization>
            </author>
            <date year="2018" month="December"/>
          </front>
          <annotation>IEEE Standard 802.1AE</annotation>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="NIST-ENTROPY" target="https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/90/b/final">
          <front>
            <title>Recommendation for the Entropy Sources Used for Random Bit Generation</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Turan" fullname="M. Turan">
              <organization>(US) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)</organization>
            </author>
            <date year="2018" month="January"/>
          </front>
          <annotation>Special Publication 800-90B</annotation>
        </reference>
      </references>
    </references>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
