Copyright Notice

Using SHA2 Algorithms with Cryptographic Message Syntax This document describes the conventions for using the Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA) message digest algorithms (SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, SHA-512) with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). It also describes the conventions for using these algorithms with the CMS an

On the Security of the PKCS#1 v1.5 Signature Scheme

The RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signature algorithm is the most widely used digital signature scheme in practice. Its two main strengths are its extreme simplicity, which makes it very easy to implement, and that verification of signatures is significantly faster than for DSA or ECDSA. Despite the huge practical importance of RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures, providing formal evidence for their security based on plausible cryptographic hardness assumptions has turned out to be very difficult. Therefore the most recent version of PKCS#1 (RFC 8017) even recommends a replacement the more complex and less efficient scheme RSA-PSS, as it is provably secure and therefore considered more robust. The main obstacle is that RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures use a deterministic padding scheme, which makes standard proof techniques not applicable. We introduce a new technique that enables the first security proof for RSA-PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures. We prove full existential unforgeability against adaptive chosen-message attacks (EUF-CMA) under the standard RSA assumption. Furthermore, we give a tight proof under the Phi-Hiding assumption. These proofs are in the random oracle model and the parameters deviate slightly from the standard use, because we require a larger output length of the hash function. However, we also show how RSA-PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures can be instantiated in practice such that our security proofs apply. In order to draw a more complete picture of the precise security of RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures, we also give security proofs in the standard model, but with respect to weaker attacker models (key-only attacks) and based on known complexity assumptions. The main conclusion of our work is that from a provable security perspective RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 can be safely used, if the output length of the hash function is chosen appropriately

On the Security of RSA-PSS in the Wild

The RSA Probabilistic Signature Scheme (RSA-PSS) due to Bellare and Rogaway (EUROCRYPT 1996) is a widely deployed signature scheme. In particular it is a suggested replacement for the deterministic RSA Full Domain Hash (RSA-FDH) by Bellare and Rogaway (ACM CCS 1993) and PKCS#1 v1.5 (RFC 2313), as it can provide stronger security guarantees. It has since been shown by Kakvi and Kiltz (EUROCRYPT 2012, Journal of Cryptology 2018) that RSA-FDH provides similar security to that of RSA-PSS, also in the case when RSA-PSS is not randomized. Recently, Jager, Kakvi and May (ACM CCS 2018) showed that PKCS#1 v1.5 provides comparable security to both RSA-FDH and RSA-PSS. However, all these proofs consider each signature scheme in isolation, where in practice this is not the case. The most interesting case is that in TLS 1.3, PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures are still included for reasons of backwards compatibility, meaning both RSA-PSS and PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures are implemented. To save space, the key material is shared between the two schemes, which means the aforementioned security proofs no longer apply. We investigate the security of this joint usage of key material in the context of Sibling Signatures, which were introduced by Camenisch, Drijvers, and Dubovitskaya (ACM CCS 2017). It must be noted that we consider the standardised version of RSA-PSS (IEEE Standard P1363-2000), which deviates from the original scheme considered in all previous papers. We are able to show that this joint usage is indeed secure, and achieves a security level that closely matches that of PKCS#1 v1.5 signatures and that both schemes can be safely used, if the output lengths of the hash functions are chosen appropriately

Pressurized Payloads Interface Requirements Document: International Space Station Program

This Interface Requirements Document (IRD) is the principle source for interface design requirements for all National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed payloads operating in the pressurized volume of the ISS, and for ESA and JAXA payloads operated in the USOS (all non-Russian modules except JEM and Columbus). Payload developers must verify the applicable requirements in this document to ensure the safety of the ISS crew, transport vehicles, on-orbit ISS systems hardware, and neighboring payloads. This document also provides design guidance that ensures the basic operation of the payload and affects the payload's mission success. It is the responsibility of the payload developer (PD) to design in accordance with the design guidance

Copyright Notice

Transport Layer Security (TLS) Authorization Extensions This document specifies authorization extensions to the Transport Layer Security (TLS) Handshake Protocol. Extensions are carried in the client and server hello messages to confirm that both parties support the desired authorization data types. Then, if supported by both the client and the server, authorization information, such as attribute certificates (ACs) or Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) assertions, is exchanged in the supplemental data handshake message. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for examination, experimental implementation, and evaluation. This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained a