One document matched: draft-miller-microid-00.txt




Network Working Group                                          J. Miller
Internet-Draft                                                Individual
Intended status: Informational                            P. Saint-Andre
Expires: February 8, 2008                      XMPP Standards Foundation
                                                             F. Stutzman
                                                                 ClaimID
                                                          August 7, 2007


                                MicroID
                        draft-miller-microid-00

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 8, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   This specification defines the semantics of MicroID, a lightweight
   identity technology that enables the creation of a portable identity
   token based on any two Uniform Resource Identifiers.





Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   5.  Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   6.  Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   7.  Using Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     7.1.  HTML Class Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     7.2.  HTML Meta Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   8.  Internationalization Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   Appendix A.  Legacy Support  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 11
































Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


1.  Introduction

   MicroID is a lightweight identity technology that enables the
   creation of a portable identity token from any two Uniform Resource
   Identifiers ([URI]).

   Such identity tokens are desirable for several reasons:

   o  They enable individuals to assert ownership over information
      published and reputation earned on the Internet in a granular
      manner, even if that information or reputation is hosted at a
      third-party service.
   o  They enable service providers to "stamp" information and
      reputation based on a validated URI associated with an individual
      who uses the service.

   Note: The preferred discussion forum for this specification is the
   MicroID mailing list; subscription information is located at
   <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/microid> and the mailing
   list archives are located at
   <http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/microid/>.


2.  Terminology

   The following terms describe the parties involved in the production
   and consumption of a MicroID:

   o  Consumer -- Any party that reads a MicroID issued by an Issuer (in
      other identity systems, a Consumer is sometimes called a Relying
      Party).
   o  Entity -- Either party identified by a URI or IRI that is used to
      construct a MicroID.
   o  Individual -- An Entity that generates information or earns
      reputation.
   o  Issuer -- The party that generates a MicroID.  The Issuer can be a
      third party and need not be an Entity.
   o  Service Provider -- An Entity that is responsible for hosting
      information or reputation; a Service Provider may or may not be an
      Issuer.

   The following keywords as used in this document are to be interpreted
   as described in [TERMS]: "MUST", "SHALL", "REQUIRED"; "MUST NOT",
   "SHALL NOT"; "SHOULD", "RECOMMENDED"; "SHOULD NOT", "NOT
   RECOMMENDED"; "MAY", "OPTIONAL".






Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


3.  Architecture

   In general we assume that MicroID technology will be used by service
   providers to stamp information or reputation that is hosted by the
   service provider on behalf of individuals.  In this architecture, the
   Service Provider is both the Issuer and one of the Entities, where
   the other Entity is an Individual.

        +--------+
        | Entity |
        +--------+
            |
            | registration
            |
   +-------------------+
   | Service Provider  |
   | (Entity + Issuer) |
   +-------------------+
            |
            | issuance
            |
         MicroID

   However, a MicroID can also be issued by a trusted third party with
   which both a Service Provider and Individual have registered.  In
   this architecture, the Service Provider is merely one of the
   Entities.

   +--------+    +------------------+
   | Entity |    | Service Provider |
   +--------+    +------------------+
       |                 |
       |                 |
       +-----------------+
              |
              | registration
              |
          +--------+
          | Issuer |
          +--------+
              |
              | issuance
              |
           MicroID







Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


4.  Format

   The syntax for a MicroID is defined below using the Augmented Backus-
   Naur Form as defined in [ABNF].

   microid = inputs ":" algo ":" hash
   inputs  = scheme "+" scheme
   scheme  = ALPHA *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "+" / "-" / "." )
             ; a URI scheme name (e.g., mailto)
   algo    = ALPHA *( ALPHA / DIGIT )
             ; the short name of a hashing
             ; algorithm (e.g., sha256),
   hash    = *( ALPHA / DIGIT )
             ; a hash of the URIs for both entities

   Note: See the Legacy Support (Appendix A) section of this document
   for information regarding the original MicroID format.


5.  Generation

   A MicroID MUST be generated by an Issuer, not by an Individual.  The
   Issuer MAY be the Service Provider that hosts the information about,
   content created by, or reputation earned by an Individual, or it MAY
   be a third party trusted by both the Individual and the Service
   Provider.

   An Issuer MUST NOT generate a MicroID until it has verified that the
   Individual or Service Provider has control over a given EntityURI.
   Methods for such verification are out of scope for this specification
   and may vary according to local service policies and the URI scheme
   in question.

   In general, the method for generating the hash is:

   hash = algo(
               algo(EntityURI)
               +
               algo(EntityURI)
              )

   The "algo" MAY be any recognized hashing algorithm, such as those
   defined in [SHA].  Support for the sha1 and sha256 algorithms is
   REQUIRED for interoperability.  The algorithm names shall be as
   registered with the IANA in the Hash Function Textual Names registry
   located at
   <http://www.iana.org/assignments/hash-function-text-names>.  The
   output MUST be in hexadecimal (not base64) format.  The same



Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


   algorithm MUST be used for all hashing functions when generating a
   given MicroID.

   The "EntityURI" MAY conform to any URI scheme, such as [HTTP],
   [MAILTO], [SIP], or [XMPP].  The first EntityURI MUST be that of the
   Individual and the second EntityURI MUST be that of the Service
   Provider.  Any given EntityURI MAY have meaning above and beyond that
   encapsulated in the relevant URI scheme; for example, the HTTP URI
   for an Individual could be hosted by an OpenID service (see
   <http://openid.net/>).  However, MicroID places no restrictions on
   the semantics of a given EntityURI.

   As an example, consider the following inputs, from which a MicroID is
   generated using the sha1 algorithm:

   o  The first Entity is an Individual identified by an XMPP URI of
      "xmpp:stpeter@jabber.org".
   o  The second Entity is a Service Provider identified by a HTTP URI
      of "https://www.xmpp.net/".

   The hash is generated as follows (note: the line break in the third
   example is included only for the sake of readability):

   sha1(
        sha1(xmpp:stpeter@jabber.org)
        +
        sha1(https://www.xmpp.net/)
       )

   sha1(
        afa6353518f818af2f036da336c3097dedc00dee
        +
        3115de01ebfa34a34314060b5f30038b0fa359f8
       )

   sha1(
   afa6353518f818af2f036da336c3097dedc00dee
   3115de01ebfa34a34314060b5f30038b0fa359f8
       )

   6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921

   Thus the issued MicroID is:

   xmpp+https:sha1:6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921






Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


6.  Processing

   A processing application MAY use only the hash portion of the MicroID
   for comparison purposes.  An implementation SHOULD be liberal in
   accepting MicroIDs that conform to the legacy format (see the Legacy
   Support (Appendix A) section of this document).


7.  Using Technologies

   This specification does not limit the technologies that might make
   use of MicroIDs, and future versions of this specification might
   describe a wide range of such uses.  Here we describe two such uses.

   Note: The scope of information (e.g., markup) covered by a MicroID
   depends on the nature of the using technology and must be defined
   separately by each using technology.

7.1.  HTML Class Attribute

   One possible use is to include a MicroID in the [HTML] class
   attribute.  The RECOMMENDED format is to prepend the MicroID itself
   with the string "microid-", as shown in the following example:

   <p class='microid-xmpp+https:sha1:
   6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921'>
   mycontent</p>

   In this usage, the scope of the MicroID is all information contained
   within the element that possesses the class attribute, whether that
   information is represented as attributes, character data, or child
   elements.  However, any given child element MAY itself possess a
   class attribute specifying a MicroID that overrides the content claim
   asserted by the parent element.  In all cases, the relevant claim is
   always that of the nearest containing element in the hierarchy.

   A MicroID can be used on its own to mark content as created by a
   certain Individual (e.g., a comment made on a web forum):

   <div class='
   microid-xmpp+https:sha1:6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921'>
     <p>This is a great idea!</p>
   </div>

   A MicroID can be also used in concert with other lightweight identity
   technologies such as the rel='me' value defined by XHTML Friends
   Network (XFN) as specified at <http://gmpg.org/xfn/11>:




Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


   <div class='
     microid-xmpp+https:sha1:6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921'>
     <p>This is a great idea!</p>
     <p>--<a rel='me'
             href='http://2idi.com/contact/=stpeter'>
             stpeter</a></p>
   </div>

7.2.  HTML Meta Data

   Another possible use is in meta data about an [HTML] file (e.g., to
   signify that a given web page is created by, owned by, or about a
   given Individual).  This is done by including a <meta/> tag whose
   'name' attribute is "microid" and whose 'content' attribute specifies
   the MicroID, as shown in the following example:

  <meta
    name='microid'
    content='xmpp+https:sha1:6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921'/>

   In this usage, the scope of the MicroID is the page itself.  However,
   the whole-page claim represented in the META tag can be overridden by
   claims represented in class attributes possessed by elements within
   the HTML body.

   A file MAY contain multiple META tags with a name of "microid" (e.g.,
   to claim ownership by multiple authors or to represent multiple
   identities associated with the same individual).


8.  Internationalization Considerations

   A MicroID SHOULD be constructed using two Uniform Resource
   Identifiers ([URI]) but one or both inputs MAY instead be an
   Internationalized Resource Identifier ([IRI]).


9.  Security Considerations

   MicroID is a technology for identifying the ownership or authorship
   of information on the Internet.  It is not a mechanism for
   authentication, authorization, security, or encryption.  Use of
   MicroID technology results only in weak verification of identities.
   MicroID may be susceptible to [DNS] poisoning attacks unless [DNSSEC]
   is used, since most URIs depend on DNS.


10.  References



Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


10.1.  Normative References

   [ABNF]    Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
             Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, October 2005.

   [SHA]     National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Secure
             Hash Standard", FIPS PUB 180-2, August 2002, <http://
             csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-2/
             fips180-2withchangenotice.pdf>.

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

   [URI]     Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
             Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
             RFC 3986, January 2005.

10.2.  Informative References

   [DNS]     Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
             specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.

   [DNSSEC]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
             Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
             RFC 4033, March 2005.

   [HTML]    Jacobs, I., Raggett, D., and A. Hors, "HTML 4.01
             Specification", World Wide Web Consortium
             Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,
             <http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.

   [HTTP]    Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter,
             L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer
             Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.

   [IRI]     Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationalized Resource
             Identifiers (IRIs)", RFC 3987, January 2005.

   [MAILTO]  Hoffman, P., Masinter, L., and J. Zawinski, "The mailto URL
             scheme", RFC 2368, July 1998.

   [SIP]     Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
             A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler,
             "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.

   [XMPP]    Saint-Andre, P., "Internationalized Resource Identifiers
             (IRIs) and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) for the
             Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)",



Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


             RFC 4622, August 2006.


Appendix A.  Legacy Support

   MicroID originally assumed the use of sha1 as the hashing algorithm
   and did not specify the schemes of the EntityURI inputs, resulting in
   the following format:

   microid = hash
   hash    = *( ALPHA / DIGIT )
             ; a hash of the URIs for both entities

   For example, using the same inputs as shown in the body of this
   specification, the MicroID in legacy format would be:

   6196ea6709be2a4cbdf2bc0cfaeac491f2fb8921

   An implementation MUST generate MicroIDs in the format specified in
   the Format (Section 4) section of this document, but SHOULD process
   MicroIDs generated using the legacy format for the sake of backward
   compatibility.


Authors' Addresses

   Jeremie Miller
   Individual

   Email: jeremie@jabber.org


   Peter Saint-Andre
   XMPP Standards Foundation

   Email: stpeter@jabber.org


   Fred Stutzman
   ClaimID

   Email: fred@metalab.unc.edu









Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft                   MicroID                     August 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Acknowledgment

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





Miller, et al.          Expires February 8, 2008               [Page 11]


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-23 21:58:36