HIP Research Group Pascal Urien Internet Draft Telecom ParisTech Intended status: Experimental Gyu Myoung Lee Telecom SudParis Expires: December, 2010 Guy Pujolle LIP6 June 2010 HIP support for RFIDs draft-irtf-hiprg-rfid-00 Abstract This document describes an architecture based on the Host Identity Protocol (HIP), for active tags, i.e. RFIDs (Radio Frequency Identifiers) that include tamper resistant computing resources, as specified for example in the ISO 14443 or 15693 standards. HIP-Tags never expose their identity in clear text, but hide this value (typically an EPC-Code) by a particular equation (f) that can be only solved by a dedicated entity, referred as the portal. HIP exchanges occurred between HIP-Tags and portals; they are shuttled by IP packets, through the Internet cloud. Requirements Language 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]. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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." This Internet-Draft will expire on December 2010. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 1] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2010 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. All IETF Documents and the information contained therein 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 THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Table of Contents Abstract........................................................... 1 Requirements Language.............................................. 1 Status of this Memo................................................ 1 Copyright Notice................................................... 2 Table of Contents.................................................. 2 1 Overview......................................................... 4 1.1 Motivation.................................................. 4 1.2 Passive and active tags..................................... 4 1.3 About the Internet of Things (IoT).......................... 5 1.4 HIP-Tags.................................................... 5 1.5 Main differences between HIP-TAGS and HIP................... 6 2. Basic Exchange.................................................. 7 2.1 I1-T........................................................ 7 2.2 R1-T........................................................ 8 2.3 I2-T........................................................ 8 2.4 R2-T........................................................ 9 3. Formats........................................................ 10 3.1 Payload.................................................... 10 3.2 Packets types.............................................. 11 3.3 Summary of HIP parameters.................................. 12 3.4 R-T........................................................ 12 3.5 HIP-T-Transform............................................ 13 3.6 F-T........................................................ 13 3.7 Signature-T................................................ 14 3.8 ESP-Transform.............................................. 14 3.9 ESP-Info................................................... 14 Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 2] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 4. BEX Example.................................................... 15 4.1 Generic example............................................ 15 4.1.1 I1-T ................................................ 15 4.1.2 R1-T ................................................ 15 4.1.3 I2-T ................................................ 16 4.1.4 R2-T ................................................ 17 4.2 HIP-T Transform 0x0001, HMAC............................... 17 4.2.1 I1-T ................................................ 17 4.2.2 R1-T ................................................ 17 4.2.3 I2-T ................................................ 18 5. HIP-T-Transforms Definition.................................... 18 5.1 Type 0x0001, HMAC.......................................... 18 5.1.1 F-T computing (f function) .......................... 18 5.1.2 K-Auth-Key computing (g function) ................... 18 5.1.3 Signature-T computing ............................... 19 5.2 Type 0x0002, Keys-Tree..................................... 19 5.2.1 F-T computing (f function) .......................... 19 5.2.2 K-Auth-Key computing (g function) ................... 20 5.2.3 Signature-T computing ............................... 20 6. Security Considerations........................................ 21 7. IANA Considerations............................................ 21 8 References...................................................... 21 8.1 Normative references....................................... 21 8.2 Informative references..................................... 21 Author's Addresses................................................ 22 Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 3] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 1 Overview 1.1 Motivation RFIDs are electronic devices, associated to things or computers, who transmit their identity (usually a serial number) via radio links. The first motivation for designing HIP support for RFIDs is to enforce a strong privacy for the Internet of Things, e.g. identity is protected by cryptographic procedures compatible with RFID computing resources. As an illustration EPC codes or IP addresses are today transmitted in clear form. The second motivation is to define an identity layer for RFIDs logically independent from the transport facilities, which may optionally support IP stacks. In other words we believe that the Internet of Things will be Identity oriented; RFIDs will act as electronic ID for objects to which they are linked. In this context privacy is a major challenge. 1.2 Passive and active tags An RFID is a slice of silicon whose area is about 1 mm2 for components used as cheap electronic tags, and around 25 mm2 for chips like contact-less smart cards inserted in passports and mobile phones. RFIDs are divided into two classes, the first includes devices that embed CPU and memories (RAM, ROM, E2PROM) such as contact-less smart cards, the second comprises electronic chips based on cabled logic circuits. There are multiple standards relative to RFIDs. The ISO 14443 standard introduces components dealing with the 13,56Mhz frequency that embed a CPU and consume about 10mW; data throughput is about 100 Kbits/s and the maximum working distance (from the reader) is around 10cm. The ISO 15693 standard also uses the same 13,56 MHz frequency, but enables working distances as high as one meter, with a data throughput of a few Kbits/s. The ISO 18000 standard defines parameters for air interface communications associated with frequency such as 135 KHz, 13,56 MHz, 2.45 GHz, 5.8 GHz, 860 to 960 MHz and 433 MHz. The ISO 18000-6 standard uses the 860-960 MHz range and is the basis for the Class-1 Generation-2 UHF RFID, introduced by the EPCglobal [EPCGLOBAL] consortium. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 4] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 1.3 About the Internet of Things (IoT) The term "Internet of Thing (IoT)" was invented by the MIT Auto-ID Center, in 2001, and refers to an architecture that comprises four levels, - Passive tags, such as Class-1 Generation-2 UHF RFIDs, introduced by the EPC Global consortium and operating in the 860-960 MHz range. - Readers plugged to a local (computing) system, which read the Electronic Product Code [EPC]. - A local system, offering IP connectivity, which collects information pointed by the EPC thanks to a protocol called Object Naming Service (ONS) - EPCIS (EPC Information Services) servers, which process incoming ONS requests and returns PML (Physical Markup Language) files [PML], e.g. XML documents that carry meaningful information linked to tags. 1.4 HIP-Tags This document suggests embedding a modified version of HIP stack in active tags, named HIP-Tags. It assumes that such devices would not support an IP stack, but should be rather identity oriented, i.e. will use readers IP resources in order to unveil their EPC-Code only to trusted entities (called portals in the architecture in Figure 1). Privacy, e.g. identity protection seems a key prerequisite [SEC] before the effective massive deployment of these devices. PORTAL READER TAG +-----------------------+ ! ! +-----------+ ! +-----+ ! ! +-------+ ! ! +---------+ + HIP + !<========================>! + HIP + ! ! + IDENTITY+ +-----+ ! +-------------------+ ! +-------+ ! ! + SOLVER + [HAT] !<=>! [HAT] ! ! | ! ! +---------+ +-----+ ! ! +------+-------+ ! ! +-------+ ! ! + + ! ! + + RFID + ! ! + RFID + ! ! EPC-Code + IP + !<=>! + IP + Radio + !<>! + Radio + ! ! + + ! ! + + Ptcol + ! ! + Ptcol + ! ! +-----+ ! ! +------+-------+ ! ! +-------+ ! ! ! ! ! ! ! +----------+------------+ +-------------------+ +-----------+ ! V TO EPC GLOBAL SERVICES Figure 1. HIP-Tag Architecture Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 5] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 The functional HIP-TAG architecture includes three logical entities, - HIP tags. HIP is transported by IP packets. HIP tags support a modified version of this protocol but don't require end-to-end IP transport. - RFID readers. They provide IP connectivity and communicate with tags through radio link either defined by EPC Global or ISO standards. The IP layer transports HIP messages between tags and other HIP entities. According to HIP, an SPI (Security Parameter Index) associated to an IPSEC tunnel MAY be used by the IP host (e.g. a reader) in order to route HIP packets to/from the right software identity. - HAT, HIP Address Translator. HIP messages MAY be encapsulated by protocols such as UDP in order to facilitate HIP transport in existing software and networking architectures. The HAT does not modify the content of an HIP packet. - PORTAL entity. This device manages a set of readers; it is an HIP entity that includes a full IP stack. Communications between portal and tags logically work as peer to peer HIP exchanges. RFID identity (HIT) is hidden and appears as a pseudo random value; within the portal a software block called the IDENTITY SOLVER resolves an equation f, whose solution is an EPC Code. The portal accesses to EPCIS services; when required privacy may be enforced by legacy protocol such as SSL or IPSEC. - The portal maintains a table linking HIT and EPC-Code. It acts as a router for that purpose it MUST provide an identity resolution mechanism, i.e. a relation between HIT and EPC-Code. 1.5 Main differences between HIP-TAGS and HIP In HIP [HIP], the HIT (Host Identifier Tag) is a fix value obtained from the hash of an RSA public key. This parameter is therefore linked to a unique identity, and can be used for traceability purposes; in other words HIP does not natively include privacy features. In [BLIND], it is proposed to hide the HIT with by random number thanks to a hash function, i.e. B-HIT = sha1(HIT || N), with N a random value and || the concatenation operation. The case in which only one HIT (either imitator or responder) is blinded looks similar to the HIP-TAGS protocol described in this draft working with a particular transform (HMAC Transform, 0x001) Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 6] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 2. Basic Exchange The HIP-Tags basic exchange (T-BEX) is derived from the "classical" BEX exchange, introduced in [HIP]. It is a four ways handshake illustrated by Figure 2. TAG READER PORTAL --+-- --+-- ---+--- ! START ! ! !<---------------! ! ! ! ! ! I1-T ! ! HIT-I HIT-R ! ! ----------------------------------------------------> ! ! ! ! ! ! R1-T ! ! HIT-I HIT-R R-T(r1) HIP-T-Transforms ! ! [ESP-Transforms] ! ! <---------------------------------------------------- ! ! ! ! ! ! I2-T ! ! HIT-I HIT-R HIP-T-Transform [ESP-Transform] R-T(r2) ! ! F-T=f(r1, r2, EPC-Code) [ESP-Info] Signature-T ! ! ----------------------------------------------------> ! ! ! ! ! ! R2-T ! ! HIT-I HIT-R [ESP-Info] Signature-T ! ! <---------------------------------------------------- ! ! ! ! ! ! Optional ESP Dialog ! ! <---------------------------------------------------> ! ! ! ! ! Figure 2. HIP-Tags Basic Exchange (T-BEX) A HAT layer MAY be used to transport HIP messages in non IP context, but this optional facility is out of scope from this document. 2.1 I1-T When a reader detects a tag, it realizes all low level operations in order to set up a radio communication link. Finally the reader delivers a START message that trigs the tag. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 7] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 The HIP tag sends the I1-T packet (I suffix meaning initiator), in which HIT-I is a true random value internally generated by the HIP- Tag. If the tag doesn't known the portal HIT it sets the HIT-R value to zero; in that case the reader MAY modify this field in order to identify the appropriate entity. The I1-T message is not signed. 2.2 R1-T The portal produces the R1-T (R suffix meaning responder) packet, which includes a nonce r1 and optional parameters. These fields indicate a list of supported authentication schemes (HIP-T- TRANSFORMs) and a list of ESP-TRANSFORMs, i.e. secure channels that could be opened between portal and tags. This message includes the following fields: - HIT-I, a random number which identified a TAG - HIT-R, the portal HIP either a null or fix value. - HIT-T-TRANSFORMs, a list of authentication schemes - ESP-T-TRANSFORM, an optional list of ESP secure channels The R1-T message is not signed. 2.3 I2-T The HIP-Tag builds the I2-T message, which contains - The selected HIP-T-TRANSFORM (the current authentication scheme). - An optional ESP-TRANSFORM (a class of secure channel between tag and portal). - A nonce r2, included in the R-T attribute. - An equation f(r1, r2, EPC-Code), whose solution, according to the selected HIP-T-TRANSFORM, unveils the EPC-Code value. - An optional ESP-Info attribute that gives information about the secure (ESP) channel, and which includes the SPI-I value. - A signature (Signature-T), which works with a KI-Auth-key deduced from r1, r2 and the hidden EPC-CODE value. KI-Auth-key = g(r1, r2, EPC-Code) The signature is computed over the complete I2-T message, the content of Signature-T resulting from this calculation is initially set to a nul value The portal and the tag shares secret keys. The meaning of these keys are dependent upon the f equation. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 8] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 In some cases the EPC-Code is the only shared key. The portal knows a list of EPC-Code and tries all solutions for solving f, according to brute force techniques. As an illustration a hash function may be used for f: f= sha1(r1 || r2 || EPC-Code), where || is the concatenation operation. In other cases a set of keys is shared between portal and tags. For example a binary tree of HMAC procedure may be used, each Hmac beeing assocaited to a particular key. A binary tree of order p may identify 2**p tags, each of them stores p keys. The f function is a list of p values such as HMAC(r1 || r2, ki || cti) Where ki is a secret ki and cti the bit value (either 0 or 1) at the rang i for the EPC-Code (or tag index) 2.4 R2-T The fourth and last R2-T packet is optional. It includes - A signature (Signature-T) computed with the KI-Auth-key deduced from r1, r2 and the hidden EPC-CODE value. KI-Auth-key = g(r1, r2, EPC-Code) - An optional ESP-Info attribute that gives information about the secure (ESP) channel, and which includes the SPI-R value. The R2-T packet is mandatory when an ESP channel has been previously negotiated. ESP channel is required if the portal intends to perform read or write operations with the tags. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 9] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 3. Formats 3.1 Payload The payload format is imported from the [HIP] specification. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Next Header | Header Length |0| Packet Type | VER. | RES.|1| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Checksum | Controls | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Sender's Host Identity Tag (HIT) | | | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Receiver's Host Identity Tag (HIT) | | | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | / HIP Parameters / / / | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Next Header : normal value is decimal 59, IPPROTO_NONE. Header Length: the length of the HIP Header and HIP parameters in 8 bytes units, excluding the first 8 bytes Packet Type: Detailed in section 4.2 VER: 0001 RES: 000 Checksum: This checksum covers the source and destination addresses in the IP header. HIP-Tags always deliver HIP packets with the null value for the checksum field. The reader MUST compute the checksum. HIP tags do not check the checksum of received packets. Controls: this field is reserved for future use (RFU) Sender's Host Identity Tag: 16 bytes HIT Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 10] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 Receiver's Host Identity Tag: 16 bytes HIT HIP Parameters: a list of attributes encoded in the TLV format 3.2 Packets types +-----------------+-------------------------------------------+ | Packet type | Packet name | +-----------------+-------------------------------------------+ | 0x40 | I1-T - The HIP-Tag Initiator Packet | | | | | 0x41 | R1-T - The HIP-Tag Responder Packet | | | | | 0x42 | I2-T - The Second HIP-Tag Initiator Packet| | | | | 0x43 | R2-T - The Second HIP-Tag Responder Packet| | | | +-----------------+-------------------------------------------+ Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 11] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 3.3 Summary of HIP parameters +----------------------+-------+----------+-----------------------+ | TLV | Type | Length | Data | +----------------------+-------+----------+-----------------------+ | R-T | 0x400 | variable | Random value r1 or r2 | | | | | | | HIP-T-TRANSFORM | 0x402 | variable | HIP-Tag transform | | | | | | | F-T | 0x404 | variable | f function value | | | | | | | Signature-T | 0x406 | variable | Signature | | | | | | | ESP-Transform | 0x408 | variable | ESP transforms | | | | | | | ESP-Info | 0x40A | variable | ESP parameters | | | | | | +----------------------+-------+----------+-----------------------+ 3.4 R-T 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Padding-Length | value / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / value | Padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Type 0x400 Length total length in bytes Value random value Padding-Length padding length in bytes Padding padding bytes Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 12] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 3.5 HIP-T-Transform 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Padding-Length | Suite-ID#1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + Length-of-Suite-ID#1 | value + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / value | Suite-ID#2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | Padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Type 0x402 Length Total length Padding-Length Number of padding bytes Suite-ID Defines the HIP Cipher Suite to be used Length-of-Suite-ID Defines the length of optional data Padding Padding bytes 3.6 F-T 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Padding-Length | value | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | Padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Type 0x404 Length total length, in bytes Padding-Length padding length in bytes Value f value Padding padding bytes Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 13] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 3.7 Signature-T 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Padding-Length | Signature / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Padding | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Type 0x406 Length total length, in bytes Padding-Length padding length, in bytes Value Signature value Padding padding bytes A signature procedure works with the K-Auth-Key and is computed over the whole HIP message according to the following rules - The checksum field of the HIP header is set to a null value. - The signature field of the Signature-T attribute is set to a null value 3.8 ESP-Transform To be defined 3.9 ESP-Info To be defined Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 14] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 4. BEX Example 4.1 Generic example 4.1.1 I1-T Next Header: 0x3B Header Length: 0x4 Packet Type: 0x40 Version: 0x1 Reserved: 0x1 Control: 0x0 Checksum: 0x0000 Sender's HIT (Tag) : 0x0123456789ABCDEF 0123456789ABCDEF Receiver's HIT (Portal) : 0x0000000000000000 0000000000000000 The checksum is computed by portal and reader according to rules specified in [HIP]; it covers the source and destination IP addresses. 4.1.2 R1-T Next Header: 0x3B Header Length: 0xB Packet Type: 0x41 Version: 0x1 Reserved: 0x1 Control: 0x0 Checksum: 0xabcd Sender's HIT (Portal) 0xA5A5A5A5A5A5A5A5 5A5A5A5A5A5A5A5A Receiver's HIT (Tag) 0x0123456789ABCDEF 0123456789ABCDEF R-T 0x040000280002rrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrpppp HIP-T-Transforms 0x0402001000020001 000000020000pppp r1 is a 128 bits value Transforms 1, 2 are supported by the reader. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 15] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 4.1.3 I2-T Next Header: 0x3B Header Length: 0x14 Packet Type: 0x42 Version: 0x1 Reserved: 0x1 Control: 0x0 Checksum: 0x0000 Sender's HIT (Tag) : 0x0123456789ABCDEF 0123456789ABCDEF Sender's HIT (Portal) : 0xA5A5A5A5A5A5A5A5 5A5A5A5A5A5A5A5A HIP-T-Transform 0x0402001000060001 0000pppppppppppp R-T 0x040000280002rrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrpppp F-T 0x040400280002ffff ffffffffffffffff ffffffffffffffff ffffffffffffffff ffffffffffffpppp Signature-T 0x040600040006ssss ssssssssssssssss ssssssssssssssss sssspppppppppppp The tag selects the HIP-Transform number one. It produces an r2 nonce and computes a f value. It appends a 20 bytes signature. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 16] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 4.1.4 R2-T Next Header: 0x3B Header Length: 0x08 Packet Type: 0x40 Version: 0x1 Reserved: 0x1 Control: 0x0 Checksum: 0xabcd Sender's HIT (Tag) : 0x0123456789ABCDEF 0123456789ABCDEF Sender's HIT (Portal) : 0xA5A5A5A5A5A5A5A5 5A5A5A5A5A5A5A5A Signature-T 0x040600040006ssss ssssssssssssssss ssssssssssssssss sssspppppppppppp Reader ends the BEX-T. 4.2 HIP-T Transform 0x0001, HMAC EPC = 0123456789abcdefcdab 4.2.1 I1-T << 3B 04 40 11 00 00 00 00 6A 68 2E 53 51 6B 51 6F 2F 58 CE 60 25 42 1A E6 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 HEAD 3b04401100000000 sHIT 6a682e53516b516f2f58ce6025421ae6 dHIT 00000000000000000000000000000000 4.2.2 R1-T >> 3B 0A 41 11 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 6A 68 2E 53 51 6B 51 6F 2F 58 CE 60 25 42 1A E6 04 00 00 20 00 06 27 6D 03 4D DD 2D 52 79 3B 17 2C B9 5B CD 02 97 E2 DF 61 15 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 02 00 10 00 06 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 HEAD 3b0a411100000000 sHIT 00000000000000000000000000000000 dHIT 6a682e53516b516f2f58ce6025421ae6 ATT 0400 20 bytes 276d034ddd2d52793b172cb95bcd0297e2df6115 ATT 0402 04 bytes 00020000 Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 17] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 4.2.3 I2-T << 3B 13 40 11 00 00 00 00 6A 68 2E 53 51 6B 51 6F 2F 58 CE 60 25 42 1A E6 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 02 00 10 00 06 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 00 00 20 00 06 C5 95 8B 23 6B 9B 0E AA 7A BB 25 F2 7D 24 C5 04 6E 89 19 9E 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 04 00 20 00 06 80 1D BC 55 C5 F3 97 89 F8 3C 6C BA 14 50 18 7D 83 83 3C AF 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 06 00 20 00 06 2A 23 68 93 2B F7 3A BE C4 6B DD B8 3F 1B 3F 7F 9D ED 8B 83 00 00 00 00 00 00 HEAD 3b13401100000000 sHIT 6a682e53516b516f2f58ce6025421ae6 dHIT 00000000000000000000000000000000 ATT 0402 04 bytes 00010000 ATT 0400 20 bytes c5958b236b9b0eaa7abb25f27d24c5046e89199e ATT 0404 20 bytes 801dbc55c5f39789f83c6cba1450187d83833caf ATT 0406 20 bytes 2a2368932bf73abec46bddb83f1b3f7f9ded8b83 5. HIP-T-Transforms Definition 5.1 Type 0x0001, HMAC 5.1.1 F-T computing (f function) The F-T function produces a 20 bytes result, according to the relation: K = HMAC-SHA1(r1 | r2, EPC-Code) Y = f(r1, r2, EPC-Code) = HMAC-SHA1(K, CT1 | "Type 0001 key") Where: - SHA1 is the SHA1 digest function - EPC-Code is the tag identity - HMAC-SHA1 is the keyed MAC algorithm based on the SHA1 digest procedure. - CT1 is a 32 bits string, whose value is equal to 0x00000001 - r1 and r2 are the two random values exchanged by the BEX 5.1.2 K-Auth-Key computing (g function) The K-Auth-Key is computing according to the relation: Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 18] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 K = HMAC-SHA1(r1 | r2, EPC-Code) Y = HMAC-SHA1(K, CT2 | "Type 0001 key") Where: - SHA1 is the SHA1 digest function - EPC-Code is the tag identity - HMAC-SHA1 is the keyed MAC algorithm based on the SHA1 digest procedure. - CT2 is a 32 bits string, whose value is equal to 0x00000002 - r1 and r2 are the two random values exchanged by the BEX 5.1.3 Signature-T computing The HMAC-SHA1 function is used with the K-Auth-Key secret value: Signature-T(HIT-T packet) = HMAC-SHA1(K-Auth-Key, HIP-T packet) 5.2 Type 0x0002, Keys-Tree 5.2.1 F-T computing (f function) The F-T function produces a list of Hi, 1<= i <= n, of nx20 bytes results, according to the relation: Y = f(r1, r2, EPC-Code) = H1 | H2 | Hi | Hn With Hi = HMAC-SHA1(r1 | r2, Ki | CT1 ) Or Hi = HMAC-SHA1(r1 | r2, Ki | CT2 ) Where: - SHA1 is the SHA1 digest function - Ki is a set of n secret keys. Each EPC-Code is associated with an index of n bits, whose value b1b2...bn is secretly notified by the list H1 H2...Hn - HMAC-SHA1 is the keyed MAC algorithm based on the SHA1 digest procedure. - CT1 is a 32 bits string, whose value is equal to 0x00000001 Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 19] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 - CT2 is a 32 bits string, whose value is equal to 0x00000002 - r1 and r2 are the two random values exchanged by the BEX 5.2.2 K-Auth-Key computing (g function) The K-Auth-Key is computing according to the relation: K = HMAC-SHA1(r1 | r2, EPC-Code) Y = HMAC-SHA1(K, CT1 | "Type 0002 key") Where: - SHA1 is the SHA1 digest function - EPC-Code is the tag identity - HMAC-SHA1 is the keyed MAC algorithm based on the SHA1 digest procedure. - CT1 is a 32 bits string, whose value is equal to 0x00000001 - r1 and r2 are the two random values exchanged by the BEX 5.2.3 Signature-T computing The HMAC-SHA1 function is used with the K-Auth-Key secret value: Signature-T(HIT-T packet) = HMAC-SHA1(K-Auth-Key, HIP-T packet) Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 20] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 6. Security Considerations To be done. 7. IANA Considerations None 8 References 8.1 Normative references [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [HIP] R. Moskowitz, P. Nikander, P. Jokela, T. Henderson, Host Identity Protocol, RFC 5201, April 2008. 8.2 Informative references [EPC] Brock, D.L, The Electronic Product Code (EPC), A Naming Scheme for Physical Objects, MIT AUTO-ID CENTER, 2001. [PML] Brock, D.L - The Physical Markup Language, MIT AUTO-ID CENTER, 2001. [EPCGLOBAL] EPCglobal, EPC Radio Frequency Identity Protocols Class 1 1516 Generation 2 UHF RFID Protocol for Communications at 860 MHz-960 MHz Version 1517 1.0.9, EPCglobal Standard, January 2005. [NIST-800-108] NIST Special Publication 800-108, Recommendation for Key Derivation Using Pseudorandom Functions. [SEC] S. Weis, S. Sarma, R. Rivest and D. Engels. "Security and privacy aspects of low-cost radio frequency identification systems" In D. Hutter, G. Muller, W. Stephan and M. Ullman, editors, International Conference on Security in Pervasive Computing - SPC 2003, volume 2802 of Lecture Notes in computer Science, pages 454- 469. Springer-Verlag, 2003. [HIP-TAG-EXP] Pascal Urien, Simon Elrharbi, Dorice Nyamy, Herve Chabanne, Thomas Icart, Francois Lecocq, Cyrille Pepin, Khalifa Toumi, Mathieu Bouet, Guy Pujolle, Patrice Krzanik, Jean-Ferdinand Susini, "HIP-Tags architecture implementation for the Internet of Things", AH-ICI 2009. First Asian Himalayas International Conference on Internet, 3-5 Nov. 2009. [BLIND] Dacheng Zhang, Miika Komu, "An Extension of HIP Base Exchange to Support Identity Privacy", draft-zhang-hip-privacy-protection-00, work in progress, Mar. 2010. Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 21] HIP support for RFIDs June 2010 Author's Addresses Pascal Urien Telecom ParisTech 37/39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France Email: Pascal.Urien@telecom-paristech.fr Gyu Myoung Lee Telecom SudParis 9 rue Charles Fourier, 91011 Evry, France Email: gm.lee@it-sudparis.eu Guy Pujolle Laboratoire d'informatique de Paris 6 (LIP6) 4 place Jussieu 75005 Paris France Email: Guy.Pujolle@lip6.fr Urien Expires December 2010 [Page 22]