RFC 9231
Additional XML Security Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)
Additional XML Security Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) 💖
okay bestie, this is RFC 9231 and it's giving official spec drop ✨ Here's the title block so you know who's behind it:
- Stream: Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) 🌈
- Number: RFC 9231 🎀
- Title: Additional XML Security Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)
- Author: D. Eastlake 3rd, Futurewei Technologies, Inc. 👑
- Date: July 2022 🌸
- Category: Standards Track 🦋
- Obsoletes: 6931 💅 (this one replaces RFC 6931, so that's the old version)
- ISSN: 2070-1721 ⭐
Abstract 🌷
okay so the main job here is to update and correct the IANA "XML Security URIs" registry 🧚 That's the list of URIs meant for XML digital signatures, encryption, canonicalization, and key management. Those URIs name algorithms and types of information. This doc also obsoletes RFC 6931 and fixes three errata against it 🔥
Status of This Memo ✨
this one is an Internet Standards Track document 💜
it's a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) 🌸 It represents the consensus of the IETF community, got public review, and was approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). If you want more on Internet Standards, check Section 2 of RFC 7841 📖
for the current status, any errata, and how to give feedback, go to https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9231 🦋
Copyright Notice 🌈
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. 💖
this doc is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) as of the publication date. Please actually read those, because they spell out your rights and restrictions 🙈 Code Components pulled from this doc have to include Revised BSD License text, as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions, and they come without warranty as the Revised BSD License says 💅
Table of Contents 🗺️
1. Introduction
1.1. Terminology
1.2. Acronyms
2. Algorithms
2.1. DigestMethod (Hash) Algorithms
2.1.1. MD5
2.1.2. SHA-224
2.1.3. SHA-384
2.1.4. Whirlpool
2.1.5. SHA-3 Algorithms
2.2. SignatureMethod MAC Algorithms
2.2.1. HMAC-MD5
2.2.2. HMAC SHA Variations
2.2.3. HMAC-RIPEMD160
2.2.4. Poly1305
2.2.5. SipHash-2-4
2.2.6. XMSS and XMSSMT
2.3. SignatureMethod Public Key Signature Algorithms
2.3.1. RSA-MD5
2.3.2. RSA-SHA256
2.3.3. RSA-SHA384
2.3.4. RSA-SHA512
2.3.5. RSA-RIPEMD160
2.3.6. ECDSA-SHA*, ECDSA-RIPEMD160, ECDSA-Whirlpool
2.3.7. ESIGN-SHA*
2.3.8. RSA-Whirlpool
2.3.9. RSASSA-PSS with Parameters
2.3.10. RSASSA-PSS without Parameters
2.3.11. RSA-SHA224
2.3.12. Edwards-Curve
2.4. Minimal Canonicalization
2.5. Transform Algorithms
2.5.1. XPointer
2.6. EncryptionMethod Algorithms
2.6.1. ARCFOUR Encryption Algorithm
2.6.2. Camellia Block Encryption
2.6.3. Camellia Key Wrap
2.6.4. PSEC-KEM, RSAES-KEM, and ECIES-KEM
2.6.5. SEED Block Encryption
2.6.6. SEED Key Wrap
2.6.7. ChaCha20
2.6.8. ChaCha20+Poly1305
2.7. Key AgreementMethod Algorithm
2.7.1. X25519 and X448 Key Agreement
2.8. KeyDerivationMethod Algorithm
2.8.1. HKDF Key Derivation
3. KeyInfo
3.1. PKCS #7 Bag of Certificates and CRLs
3.2. Additional RetrievalMethod Type Values
4. Indexes
4.1. Index by Fragment Index
4.2. Index by URI
5. Allocation Considerations
5.1. W3C Allocation Considerations
5.2. IANA Considerations
6. Security Considerations
7. References
7.1. Normative References
7.2. Informative References
Appendix A. Changes from RFC 6931
Appendix B. Bad URIs
Acknowledgements
Author's Address1. Introduction 🚀
okay so XML digital signatures, canonicalization, and encryption were standardized by the W3C and the joint IETF/W3C XMLDSIG working group [W3C] [XMLSEC] 💖 These are now W3C Recommendations, and some of them are also RFCs too. Here's how they line up:
+================+=============+======================+
| RFC | W3C REC | Topic |
| Status | | |
+================+=============+======================+
| [RFC3275] | [XMLDSIG10] | XML Digital |
| Draft Standard | | Signatures |
+----------------+-------------+----------------------+
| [RFC3076] | [CANON10] | Canonical XML |
| Informational | | |
+----------------+-------------+----------------------+
| - - - - - - | [XMLENC10] | XML Encryption 1.0 |
+----------------+-------------+----------------------+
| [RFC3741] | [XCANON] | Exclusive XML |
| Informational | | Canonicalization 1.0 |
+----------------+-------------+----------------------+
Table 1these docs and recs use URIs [RFC3986] to name algorithms and keying information types 🦋 The W3C then came out with the upgraded versions: XML Signature 1.1 [XMLDSIG11], Canonical XML 1.1 [CANON11], and XML Encryption 1.1 [XMLENC11], plus a brand new XML Signature Properties spec [XMLDSIG-PROP] 🌸
also, the XML Encryption rec got a boost from [GENERIC] 🧚 It defines algorithms, XML types, and elements you need to use generic hybrid ciphers in XML security apps. [GENERIC] also provides a key encapsulation algorithm and a data encapsulation algorithm, and when you combine those two, you get the generic hybrid cipher ✨
all the camel-case element names in here (names with both inner upper and lower case letters), like DigestValue, come from those docs 💅
this doc is an updated, convenient reference list of URIs and the algorithms they go with, the ones people are actually interested in 📖 It fixes Errata [Err3597], [Err3965], and [Err4004], and obsoletes [RFC6931] 🔥
all the URIs for algorithms and data types in this doc are listed in the indexes in Section 4 🗂️ The ones added by earlier RFCs or by this doc get their own subsection in Section 2 or 3. A few URIs defined somewhere else also get a subsection in Section 2 or 3, but most don't. For example, SHA-256 as defined in [XMLENC11] has no subsection here, but it's still in the indexes in Section 4 🙈
listing a URI for an algorithm in this doc does not mean the doc endorses that algorithm for any particular purpose 🫶 A protocol spec generally gives the algorithm and implementation requirements for the protocol, and this doc isn't one of those. Security stuff for algorithms keeps evolving, and it's documented elsewhere. This spec just provides some URIs and the formatting you use when you use them 💜
this doc isn't meant to change the algorithm implementation requirements of any IETF or W3C doc ✨ And the terminology from [RFC2119] and [RFC8174] is only used the way it's already stated or implied by other authoritative docs 🌈
here's the history tea ☕ Moving XML Digital Signature [RFC3275] along the Standards Track meant removing any algorithms from the original version [RFC3075] that didn't have demonstrated interoperability 😭 That included the Minimal Canonicalization algorithm, even though people were still interested in it. The URI for Minimal Canonicalization was in [RFC6931], and it's included here again 🦋
1.1. Terminology 💅
this is the important bit, so read it carefully 🫶 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174], but only when they show up in all capitals, exactly as shown here 🔥
"camel-case" means terms that are mostly lower case but have internal capital letters 🐪
1.2. Acronyms 📚
these are the acronyms used in this doc, bestie 🧚
AAD - Additional Authenticated Data
AEAD - Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data
ASN.1 - Abstract Syntax Notation 1
BER - Basic Encoding Rules [ITU-T-X.680]
DSA - Digital Signature Algorithm
DSS - Digital Signature Standard [FIPS186-4]
ECDSA - Elliptic Curve DSA
HMAC - Hashed Message Authentication Code [RFC2104] [RFC5869]
IETF - Internet Engineering Task Force <https://www.ietf.org>
MAC - Message Authentication Code
MD - Message Digest
NIST - United States National Institute of Standards and Technology
<https://www.nist.gov>
OID - Object Identifier [ITU-T-X.660]
PKCS - Public Key Cryptography Standard
RSA - Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman
SHA - Secure Hash Algorithm
URI - Uniform Resource Identifier [RFC3986]
W3C - World Wide Web Consortium <https://www.w3.org>
XML - eXtensible Markup Language2.1.3. SHA-384 💖
Identifier: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384
Okay so SHA-384 is the one that's giving "I'm strong but I'm also a little bit chill about it" 🦋 The SHA-384 algorithm [FIPS180-4] takes no explicit parameters, so there's nothing extra to fuss over 🎀 Here's what a SHA-384 DigestAlgorithm element looks like:
<DigestAlgorithm
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384" />A SHA-384 digest is a 384-bit string 🔥 The content of the DigestValue element SHALL be the base64 [RFC4648] encoding of this string viewed as a 48-octet stream. Yes, the SHALL is doing serious work here, bestie 💅
2.1.4. Whirlpool 🌊
Identifier: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool
Next up is Whirlpool, and honestly the name alone has main character energy 👑 The Whirlpool algorithm [ISO-10118-3] takes no explicit parameters either, so it's a no-fuss queen 💜 Here's the element:
<DigestAlgorithm
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool" />A Whirlpool digest is a 512-bit string ✨ The content of the DigestValue element SHALL be the base64 [RFC4648] encoding of this string viewed as a 64-octet stream. Again, that SHALL is non-negotiable, periodt 🙈
2.1.5. SHA-3 Algorithms 🍓
Identifiers: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224 http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-256 http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-384 http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-512
Okay so NIST ran a whole hash function competition as an alternative to the SHA family 🧚 The Keccak-f[1600] algorithm was selected [KECCAK]. This hash function is commonly referred to as "SHA-3" [FIPS202]. Iconic glow-up 🌈
A SHA-3 224, 256, 384, and 512 digest is a 224-, 256-, 384-, and 512-bit string, respectively. The content of the DigestValue element SHALL be the base64 [RFC4648] encoding of this string viewed as a 28-, 32-, 48-, and 64-octet stream, respectively. Here's an example of a SHA3-224 DigestAlgorithm element:
<DigestAlgorithm
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224" />2.2. SignatureMethod MAC Algorithms 🦋
This section covers SignatureMethod Message Authentication Code (MAC) Algorithms, so this is where the signing crew comes in 🫶
Note: Some text in this section is duplicated from [RFC3275] for the convenience of the reader. [RFC3275] is normative in case of conflict. Translation: if the two ever disagree, [RFC3275] wins 💅
2.2.1. HMAC-MD5 🌸
Identifier: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5
The HMAC algorithm [RFC2104] takes the truncation length in bits as a parameter. If the parameter is not specified, then all the bits of the hash are output. Here's an example of an HMAC-MD5 SignatureMethod element:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5">
<HMACOutputLength>112</HMACOutputLength>
</SignatureMethod>The output of the HMAC algorithm is the output (possibly truncated) of the chosen digest algorithm. This value SHALL be base64 [RFC4648] encoded in the same straightforward fashion as the output of the digest algorithms. For example, the SignatureValue element for the HMAC-MD5 digest from the test vectors in [RFC2104]:
9294727A 3638BB1C 13F48EF8 158BFC9Dwould be:
kpRyejY4uxwT9I74FYv8nQ==Schema Definition:
<simpleType name="HMACOutputLength">
<restriction base="integer"/>
</simpleType>DTD:
<!ELEMENT HMACOutputLength (#PCDATA) >The Schema Definition and DTD immediately above are copied from [RFC3275] 🫶
See [RFC6151] for HMAC-MD5 security considerations. Please go read that one before you do anything spicy 🙈⚠️
2.2.2. HMAC SHA Variations 💜
Identifiers: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha224 http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha256 http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha384 http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha512
SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512 [FIPS180-4] [RFC6234] can also be used in HMAC as described in Section 2.2.1 for HMAC-MD5. So the SHA crew gets to join the HMAC party too 🎀
2.2.3. HMAC-RIPEMD160 🍓
Identifier: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-ripemd160
RIPEMD-160 [ISO-10118-3] is a 160-bit hash that is used here in HMAC. The output can be optionally truncated. Here's an example:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-ripemd160">
<HMACOutputLength>144</HMACOutputLength>
</SignatureMethod>2.2.4. Poly1305 ⭐
Identifier: http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#poly1305
Poly1305 [RFC8439] [POLY1305] is a high-speed message authentication code algorithm, so it's giving speed demon 🧚 It takes a 32-octet one-time key and a message, and produces a 16-octet tag, which is used to authenticate the message. Here's an example of a Poly1305 SignatureMethod element:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#poly1305"/>2.2.5. SipHash-2-4 🌈
Identifier: http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#siphash-2-4
SipHash [SipHash1] [SipHash2] computes a 64-bit MAC from a 128-bit secret key and a variable-length message. Super tidy, right? Here's an example of a SipHash-2-4 SignatureMethod element:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#siphash-2-4"/>2.2.6. XMSS and XMSSMT ✨
Okay bestie, XMSS (eXtended Merkle Signature Scheme) and XMSSMT (XMSS Multi-Tree) [RFC8391] are stateful hash-based signature schemes [NIST800-208] 🌳✨. According to NIST, their security depends only on the security of the underlying hash functions, especially on it being infeasible to find a preimage or a second preimage. It's also believed that these hash functions won't get broken by large-scale quantum computers 🔮💜. Literally iconic.
If you want the full scoop on how these signature schemes are meant to be used, and why keeping their state managed super carefully is essential to keeping them strong, go read [NIST800-208] 📚🫶.
IANA keeps a registry whose entries match the XMSS Identifiers below (see [XMSS]) 🗂️. To build the fragment part of the URIs, you swap every underscore ("_") in the name from the IANA registry for a hyphen ("-") 🪄.
Identifiers for XMSS:
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-10-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-10-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-16-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-16-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-20-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-20-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-10-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-10-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-16-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-16-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-20-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-20-256The hash functions used in the XMSS signature schemes above are SHA2 [RFC6234] or one of the two SHAKE extensible output functions [FIPS202] 🧁. The second token of the URI extension tells you which one (SHAKE means SHAKE128) 🔍. The third token gives the tree height for XMSS, which is 10, 16, or 20 🌲. The final token gives the SHA2 or SHAKE output size, which is 192, 256, or 512 bits 📏. SHA2 with 192 bits of output means SHA2-256/192, which is the most significant 192 bits of the SHA-256 hash as specified in [NIST800-208] 💅.
IANA keeps a registry whose entries match the XMSSMT Identifiers below (see [XMSS]) 🗂️. For the fragment part of the URIs, you swap every underscore ("_") and slash ("/") in the registry name for a hyphen ("-") 🪄.
Identifiers for XMSSMT:
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-2-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-2-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-4-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-4-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-2-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-2-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-4-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-4-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-8-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-8-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-3-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-3-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-6-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-6-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-12-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-12-512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-2-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-2-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-4-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-4-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-2-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-2-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-4-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-4-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-8-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-8-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-3-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-3-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-6-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-6-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-12-192
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-12-256The hash functions used in the XMSSMT signature schemes above are SHA2 [RFC6234] or one of the two SHAKE extensible output functions [FIPS202] 🌈. The second token of the URI extension says which one (SHAKE means SHAKE128) 🔍. The third token gives the tree height, which is 20, 40, or 60 🌲. A fourth token tells you the number of layers 🥞. The final token gives the SHA2, SHAKE, or SHAKE256 output size, which is 192, 256, or 512 bits 📏. SHA2 with 192 bits of output means SHA2-256/192, which is the most significant 192 bits of the SHA-256 hash as specified in [NIST800-208] 💜.
Here's an example of an XMSS SignatureAlgorithm element 🧚:
<SignatureAlgorithm
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-192"
/>2.3. SignatureMethod Public Key Signature Algorithms 🔐
These algorithms are different from the ones in Section 2.2 because they use public key methods 🗝️. In other words, the signing key is different from the verification key, and you can't feasibly work out one from the other 🙈.
2.3.1. RSA-MD5 🍓
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5This implies the PKCS #1 v1.5 padding algorithm described in [RFC8017] 🧁. Here's an example of use:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5" />The SignatureValue content for an RSA-MD5 signature is the base64 [RFC4648] encoding of the octet string computed as per Section 8.2.1 of [RFC8017], which covers signature generation for the RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 signature scheme 🎀. As specified in the EMSA-PKCS1-V1_5-ENCODE function in Section 9.2 of [RFC8017], the value that goes into the signature function MUST contain a prepended algorithm object identifier for the hash function 🫶. Signature verifiers don't need an ASN.1 parser or OID recognition, though, since that's not required of them 💅. The PKCS #1 v1.5 representation looks like this:
CRYPT (PAD (ASN.1 (OID, DIGEST (data))))The padded ASN.1 has the following form:
01 | FF* | 00 | prefix | hashThe vertical bar ("|") means concatenation 🧩. "01", "FF", and "00" are fixed octets with those hexadecimal values, and the asterisk ("*") after "FF" means that octet repeats 🔁. "hash" is the MD5 digest of the data 🔐. "prefix" is the ASN.1 BER MD5 algorithm designator prefix that PKCS #1 [RFC8017] requires, which is:
hex 30 20 30 0c 06 08 2a 86 48 86 f7 0d 02 05 05 00 04 10This prefix is included so you can use standard cryptographic libraries more easily 📚✨. The FF octet MUST be repeated enough times that the value being CRYPTed is exactly one octet shorter than the RSA modulus 🌸.
⚠️ For MD5 security considerations, see [RFC6151]. Seriously, read it. MD5 has real problems, bestie 😭.
2.3.2. RSA-SHA256 🦋
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256This implies the PKCS #1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC8017] as described in Section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-256 algorithm designator prefix 🌷. Here's an example of use:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256" />2.3.3. RSA-SHA384 🌙
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384This implies the PKCS #1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC8017] as described in Section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-384 algorithm designator prefix 🌺. Here's an example of use:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384" />Calculating a SHA-384 message digest takes about the same effort as calculating a SHA-512 one, so it's suggested that RSA-SHA512 be used instead of RSA-SHA384 wherever possible 🤔✨.
2.3.4. RSA-SHA512 👑
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512This implies the PKCS #1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC8017] as described in Section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-512 algorithm designator prefix 💖. Here's an example of use:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512" />2.3.5. RSA-RIPEMD160 🧚♀️
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-ripemd160This implies the PKCS #1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC8017] as described in Section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER RIPEMD160 algorithm designator prefix 🌈. Here's an example of use:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-ripemd160"
/>2.3.6. ECDSA-SHA*, ECDSA-RIPEMD160, ECDSA-Whirlpool
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha1
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha224
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha256
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha384
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha512
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-224
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-256
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-384
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-512
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-ripemd160
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-whirlpoolOkay so ECDSA [FIPS186-4] is the elliptic curve version of the Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA) signature method, which is the same thing as the Digital Signature Standard (DSS) 💅. It takes no explicit parameters ✨. If you want detailed specs on using it with SHA hash functions and XML Digital Signature, check out [X9.62] and [RFC4050] 📚. The #sha3-*, #ecdsa-ripemd160, and #ecdsa-whirlpool fragments are processed the exact same way as the #ecdsa-sha1 fragment, except a SHA3 function (see Section 2.1.5), RIPEMD160, or Whirlpool (see Section 2.1.4) gets used instead of SHA-1 🔥.
The output of the ECDSA algorithm is a pair of integers, usually called the pair (r, s) 🦋. The signature value is the base64 encoding of the concatenation of two octet streams, which come from octet-encoding the values r and s in that order 🫶. Converting an integer to an octet stream must be done according to the I2OSP operation defined in [RFC8017], with the l parameter set to the size of the curve's base point order in octets (for example, 32 for the P-256 curve and 66 for the P-521 curve [FIPS186-4]) 🌸.
Want an intro to elliptic curve crypto? Read [RFC6090], and make sure you check the errata (Errata IDs 2773-2777) 🧚.
2.3.7. ESIGN-SHA*
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha224
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha256
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha384
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha512The ESIGN algorithm, specified in [IEEEP1363a], is a signature scheme based on the integer factorization problem 🧠✨.
An example of use is:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1"
/>2.3.8. RSA-Whirlpool
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-whirlpoolSame as the RSA-SHA1 algorithm in [XMLDSIG11], the designator "RSA" means the RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 algorithm defined in [RFC8017] 💖. When you use the #rsa-whirlpool fragment identifier, Whirlpool is the hash algorithm instead 🌊. The ASN.1 BER Whirlpool algorithm designator is implied, and it is this, written out as an explicit octet sequence:
hex 30 4e 30 0a 06 06 28 cf 06 03 00 37 05 00 04 40This corresponds to OID 1.0.10118.3.0.55, defined in [ISO-10118-3] 🎀.
An example of use is:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-whirlpool"
/>2.3.9. RSASSA-PSS with Parameters
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-pss
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#MGF1These identifiers use the PKCS #1 EMSA-PSS encoding algorithm [RFC8017] 🔐. RSASSA-PSS takes the digest method (hash function), a mask generation function, the salt length in octets (SaltLength), and the trailer field as explicit parameters 🍓.
Hash function algorithm identifiers from XML encryption [XMLENC11], from [XMLDSIG11], and from Section 2.1 all count as valid algorithm identifiers for hash functions 💅. According to [RFC8017], the default digest function is SHA-1, but because of the discovered weakness of SHA-1 [RFC6194], it is recommended that SHA-256 or a stronger hash function be used 🙈. Even though [RFC8017] says otherwise, SHA-256 is the default for these SignatureMethod identifiers when no hash function has been specified 👑.
The default salt length for these SignatureMethod identifiers, if SaltLength is not specified, SHALL be the number of octets in the hash value of the digest method, as recommended in [RFC4055] ✨. In a parameterized RSASSA-PSS signature, the ds:DigestMethod and the SaltLength parameters usually show up. If they don't, the defaults make it equivalent to <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha256-rsa-MGF1> (see Section 2.3.10) 🦋. The TrailerField defaults to 1 (0xBC) when it's omitted 🌈.
Schema Definition (target namespace <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#>):
<xs:element name="RSAPSSParams" type="pss:RSAPSSParamsType">
<xs:annotation>
<xs:documentation>
Top level element that can be used in xs:any namespace="#other"
wildcard of ds:SignatureMethod content.
</xs:documentation>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
<xs:complexType name="RSAPSSParamsType">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element ref="ds:DigestMethod" minOccurs="0"/>
<xs:element name="MaskGenerationFunction"
type="pss:MaskGenerationFunctionType" minOccurs="0"/>
<xs:element name="SaltLength" type="xs:int"
minOccurs="0"/>
<xs:element name="TrailerField" type="xs:int"
minOccurs="0"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="MaskGenerationFunctionType">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element ref="ds:DigestMethod" minOccurs="0"/>
</xs:sequence>
<xs:attribute name="Algorithm" type="xs:anyURI"
default="http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#MGF1"/>
</xs:complexType>2.3.10. RSASSA-PSS without Parameters
[RFC8017] currently specifies only one mask generation function, MGF1, which is based on a hash function 🧁. Even though [RFC8017] allows parameterization, the default is to use the same hash function as the digest method function. This section only supports that default approach, so a mask generation function type definition isn't needed yet 🌸. The same goes for the trailer field: [RFC8017] specifies only one value (0xBC), so this default parameter must be used for signature generation 💜. The default salt length is the length of the hash function ✨.
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-256-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-384-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-512-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#md2-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#md5-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha1-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha224-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha256-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha384-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha512-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#ripemd128-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#ripemd160-rsa-MGF1
http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool-rsa-MGF1An example of use is:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#SHA3-256-rsa-MGF1"
/>2.3.11. RSA-SHA224
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224This implies the PKCS #1 v1.5 padding algorithm [RFC8017], as described in Section 2.3.1, but with the ASN.1 BER SHA-224 algorithm designator prefix 🌷. An example of use is:
<SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224" />Fun fact that's kinda annoying 🙃: calculating a SHA-224 message digest takes about the same effort as a SHA-256 one. So it is suggested that RSA-SHA256 be used in preference to RSA-SHA224 where possible 🍓.
Also check out Appendix B for info about an erroneous version of this URI that showed up in [RFC6931] 🔍.
2.3.12. Edwards-Curve
The Edwards-curve Digital Signature Algorithm (EdDSA) is a variant of Schnorr's signature system that uses Edwards curves 🦋. A specification is provided, and some of its advantages are listed, in [RFC8032] ✨. The general EdDSA takes 11 parameters that must be carefully chosen for secure and efficient operation 🧠. Identifiers for two variants, Ed25519 and Ed448, are given below 💅.
Ed25519 uses 32-octet public keys and produces 64-octet signatures 🌈. It provides about 128 bits of security and uses SHA-512 [RFC6234] internally as part of signature generation 🔥.
Ed448 uses 57-octet public keys and produces 114-octet signatures 💜. It provides about 224 bits of security and uses "SHAKE256" [FIPS202] internally as part of signature generation. (SHAKE256 is specified by NIST as an "Extensible Output Function" and is not specified or approved by NIST as a secure hash function 🙈.)
For more on the EdDSA variants identified below, see [RFC8032] 📚.
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519ph
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519ctx
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448
http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448phAn example of use is:
<SignatureMethod Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448" />2.4. Minimal Canonicalization
So, two independent interoperable implementations of Minimal Canonicalization were never announced 😭. That's why, when "XML-Signature Syntax and Processing" moved along the Standards Track from [RFC3075] to [RFC3275], Minimal Canonicalization got dropped 💀. But people were still interested 👀. For its definition, see Section 6.5.1 of [RFC3075] 🎀.
For reference, its identifier is still:
http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#minimal2.5. Transform Algorithms
The XPointer Transform algorithm syntax is described below 🧚. All CanonicalizationMethod algorithms can also be used as Transform algorithms ✨.
2.5.1. XPointer
Identifier:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#xptrThis transform algorithm takes an [XPointer] as an explicit parameter. An example of use is:
<Transform
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr">
<XPointer
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more/xptr">
xpointer(id("foo")) xmlns(bar=http://foobar.example)
xpointer(//bar:Zab[@Id="foo"])
</XPointer>
</Transform>Schema Definition:
<element name="XPointer" type="string"/>DTD:
<!ELEMENT XPointer (#PCDATA) >Input to this transform is an octet stream, which is then parsed into XML 🌸. Output from this transform is a node set. The results of the XPointer are processed as defined in the XMLDSIG specification [RFC3275] for a same-document XPointer 💖.
2.6. EncryptionMethod Algorithms
This subsection gives identifiers and information for several EncryptionMethod Algorithms 🦋.
2.6.1. ARCFOUR Encryption Algorithm ✨
Identifier:
ARCFOUR is giving fast and simple stream encryption 🌊. It's compatible with RSA Security's RC4 algorithm [RC4] (Rivest Cipher 4). ngl though, RC4 has been found to have a number of weaknesses, so its use is prohibited in several IETF protocols, for example TLS [RFC7465]. 💀 An example EncryptionMethod element using ARCFOUR looks like this:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour">
<KeySize>40</KeySize>
</EncryptionMethod>ARCFOUR makes use of the generic KeySize parameter specified and defined in [XMLENC11]. 🎀
2.6.2. Camellia Block Encryption 🌸
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbchttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia192-cbchttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia256-cbc
Camellia is a block cipher with the same interface as the AES [CAMELLIA] [RFC3713]. It's got a 128-bit block size and 128-, 192-, and 256-bit key sizes. 🦋 In XML Encryption, Camellia gets used the same way as AES, bestie: it's used in the Cipher Block Chaining (CBC) mode with a 128-bit initialization vector (IV). The resulting cipher text is prefixed by the IV. If included in XML output, it is then base64 encoded. Here's an example Camellia EncryptionMethod:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbc"
/>2.6.3. Camellia Key Wrap 🔐
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia192http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia256
Camellia [CAMELLIA] [RFC3713] key wrap is identical to the AES key wrap algorithm [RFC3394] from the XML Encryption standard, with "AES" swapped out for "Camellia". 💅 Same as AES key wrap, the check value is 0xA6A6A6A6A6A6A6A6.
The algorithm is the same no matter what size of Camellia key you use for wrapping, which is called the "key encrypting key" or "KEK". 👑 If Camellia is supported, it is particularly suggested that wrapping 128-bit keys with a 128-bit KEK and wrapping 256-bit keys with a 256-bit KEK be supported. Iconic behaviour, honestly 🥹
An example of use:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128"
/>2.6.4. PSEC-KEM, RSAES-KEM, and ECIES-KEM 🧚
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#psec-kemhttp://www.w3.org/2010/xmlsec-ghc#rsaes-kemhttp://www.w3.org/2010/xmlsec-ghc#ecies-kem
These algorithms, specified in [ISO-18033-2], are key encapsulation mechanisms using elliptic curve or RSA encryption. RSAEA-KEM and ECIES-KEM are also specified in [GENERIC]. Two places, same vibes 💜
An example of use of PSEC-KEM:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#psec-kem">
<ECParameters>
<Version>version</Version>
<FieldID>id</FieldID>
<Curve>curve</Curve>
<Base>base</Base>
<Order>order</Order>
<Cofactor>cofactor</Cofactor>
</ECParameters>
</EncryptionMethod>See [ISO-18033-2] for information on the parameters above. 📖
2.6.5. SEED Block Encryption 🌷
Identifier:
SEED [RFC4269] is a block cipher with a 128-bit block size and 128-bit key size. In XML Encryption, SEED can be used in the Cipher Block Chaining (CBC) mode with a 128-bit initialization vector (IV). The resulting cipher text is prefixed by the IV. If included in XML output, it is then base64 encoded.
An example SEED EncryptionMethod is as follows:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#seed128-cbc" />2.6.6. SEED Key Wrap 🍓
Identifier:
Key wrapping with SEED is identical to Section 2.2.1 of [RFC3394] with "AES" replaced by "SEED". The algorithm is specified in [RFC4010]. The implementation of SEED is optional. The default initial value is 0xA6A6A6A6A6A6A6A6. 🎀
An example of use:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more#kw-seed128"
/>2.6.7. ChaCha20 🦋
Identifier:
ChaCha20 [RFC8439], a stream cipher, is a variant of Salsa20 [ChaCha]. It is considerably faster than AES in software-only implementations 🚀 In addition to a 256-bit key and the plain text to be encrypted, ChaCha20 takes a 96-bit Nonce and an initial 32-bit Counter. The Nonce and Counter are represented as hex in nested elements, as shown below.
An example of use:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#chacha20">
<Nonce>0123456789abcdef01234567</Nonce>
<Counter>fedcba09</Counter>
</EncryptionMethod>2.6.8. ChaCha20+Poly1305 💜
Identifier:
ChaCha20+Poly1305 is an Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (AEAD) algorithm. 🛡️ On top of a 256-bit key and the plain text to be encrypted and authenticated, ChaCha20+Poly1305 takes a 96-bit Nonce and variable-length Additional Authenticated Data (AAD). The Nonce is represented as a child element of the EncryptionMethod element with a hex value. The AAD is a string, which may be null. The AAD element may be absent, in which case the AAD is null. The CipherData, either present in the CipherValue or by reference, is the concatenation of the encrypted ChaCha20 output and the Poly1305 128-bit tag. 🧁
An example of use:
<EncryptionMethod
Algorithm=
"http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#chacha20poly1305">
<Nonce>0123456789abcdef01234567</Nonce>
<AAD>The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.</AAD>
</EncryptionMethod>2.7. Key AgreementMethod Algorithm 🤝
This subsection gives identifiers and information for an additional key AgreementMethod Algorithm [XMLENC11].
2.7.1. X25519 and X448 Key Agreement 🌈
Identifiers:
The X25519 and X448 key agreement algorithms are specified in [RFC7748]. ✨
2.8. KeyDerivationMethod Algorithm 🔑
This subsection gives identifiers and information for an additional KeyDerivationMethod Algorithm [XMLENC11].
2.8.1. HKDF Key Derivation 🧂
This section covers the HMAC-based Extract-and-Expand Key Derivation Function (HKDF [RFC5869]).
Identifier:
HKDF takes as inputs a hash function, an optional non-secret "salt", initial keying material (IKM), optional context and application-specific "info", and the required output keying size. Note that these strictly determine the output, so, for example, invoking HKDF at different times but with the same salt, info, initial keying material, and output key size will produce identical output keying material. 🫶
The inputs can be supplied to HKDF as follows:
- hash function: The algorithm attribute of a child DigestMethod element.
- salt: The content of a Salt child element of AgreementMethod in hex. If not provided, a string of zero octets as long as the hash function output is used, as specified in [RFC5869].
- IKM: The content of an OriginatorKeyInfo child element of AgreementMethod in hex. May be absent in some applications where this is known through some other method.
- info: The content of the KA-Nonce child element of AgreementMethod in hex.
- size: The content of a KeySize child element of AgreementMethod as a decimal number.
Here is the test case from Appendix A.1 of [RFC5869] as an example: 🧪
<AgreementMethod
algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#hkdf">
<DigestMethod
algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha256"/>
<Salt>000102030405060708090a0b0c</Salt>
<OriginatorKeyInfo>0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b
</OriginatorKeyInfo>
<KA-Nonce>f0f1f2f3f4f5f6f7f8f9</KA-Nonce>
<KeySize>42</KeySize>
</AgreementMethod>3. KeyInfo 🗝️
In Section 3.1, a KeyInfo element child is specified, while in Section 3.2, additional KeyInfo Type values for use in RetrievalMethod are specified.
3.1. PKCS #7 Bag of Certificates and CRLs 📦
A PKCS #7 [RFC2315] "signedData" can also be used as a bag of certificates and/or certificate revocation lists (CRLs). The PKCS7signedData element is defined to accommodate such structures within KeyInfo. The binary PKCS #7 structure is base64 [RFC4648] encoded. Any signer information present is ignored. The following is an example [RFC3092], eliding the base64 data:
<foo:PKCS7signedData
xmlns:foo="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more">
...
</foo:PKCS7signedData>3.2. Additional RetrievalMethod Type Values 📥
The Type attribute of RetrievalMethod is an optional identifier for the type of data to be retrieved. Dereferencing a RetrievalMethod reference for all KeyInfo types with an XML structure gives you an XML element or document with that element as the root. 🌳 The various "raw" key information types return a binary value. So they require a Type attribute, because they are not unambiguously parsable. 😭
Identifiers:
http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyNamehttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyValuehttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedDatahttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPGPKeyPackethttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPKCS7signedDatahttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawSPKISexphttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawX509CRLhttp://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more#RetrievalMethod
4. Indexes 📚
The following subsections provide an index by URI and by fragment identifier (the portion of the URI after "#") of the algorithm and KeyInfo URIs defined in this document and in the standards, plus the one KeyInfo child element name defined in this document. The "Sec/ Doc" column has the section of this document or, if not specified in this document, the standards document where the item is specified. See also [XMLSECXREF]. 🗂️
4.1. Index by Fragment Index 🔎
The initial "http://www.w3.org/" part of the URI is not included below. The first six entries have a null fragment identifier or no fragment identifier. "{Bad}" indicates a bad value that was accidentally included in [RFC6931]. Implementations SHOULD only generate the correct URI but SHOULD understand both the correct and erroneous URI. See also Appendix B. 🙈
Fragment URI Sec/Doc
--------- ---- --------
2002/06/xmldsig-filter2 [XPATH]
2006/12/xmlc12n11# {Bad} [CANON11]
2006/12/xmlc14n11# [CANON11]
TR/1999/REC-xslt-19991116 [XSLT]
TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116 [XPATH]
TR/2001/06/xml-exc-c14n# [XCANON]
TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315 [CANON10]
TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502 [SCHEMA]okay bestie, we're picking up right where the index left off 💅 here's the rest of the fragment index, with each identifier and where it's defined ✨
aes128-cbc 2001/04/xmlenc#aes128-cbc [XMLENC11]
aes128-gcm 2009/xmlenc11#aes128-gcm [XMLENC11]
aes192-cbc 2001/04/xmlenc#aes192-cbc [XMLENC11]
aes192-gcm 2009/xmlenc11#aes192-gcm [XMLENC11]
aes256-cbc 2001/04/xmlenc#aes256-cbc [XMLENC11]
aes256-gcm 2009/xmlenc11#aes256-gcm [XMLENC11]
arcfour 2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour 2.6.1
base64 2000/09/xmldsig#base64 [RFC3275]
camellia128-cbc 2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbc 2.6.2
camellia192-cbc 2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia192-cbc 2.6.2
camellia256-cbc 2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia256-cbc 2.6.2
chacha20 2021/04/xmldsig-more#chacha20 2.6.7
chacha20poly1305 2021/04/xmldsig-more#chacha20poly1305 2.6.8
ConcatKDF 2009/xmlenc11#ConcatKDF [XMLENC11]
decrypt#XML 2002/07/decrypt#XML [DECRYPT]
decrypt#Binary 2002/07/decrypt#Binary [DECRYPT]
DEREncodedKeyValue 2009/xmldsig11#DEREncodedKeyValue [XMLDSIG11]
dh 2001/04/xmlenc#dh [XMLENC11]
dh-es 2009/xmlenc11#dh-es [XMLENC11]
dsa-sha1 2000/09/xmldsig#dsa-sha1 [RFC3275]
dsa-sha256 2009/xmldsig11#dsa-sha256 [XMLDSIG11]
DSAKeyValue 2000/09/xmldsig#DSAKeyValue [XMLDSIG11]
ECDH-ES 2009/xmlenc11#ECDH-ES [XMLENC11]
ecdsa-ripemd160 2007/05/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-ripemd160 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha1 2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha1 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha224 2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha224 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha256 2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha256 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha384 2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha384 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha512 2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha512 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha3-224 2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-224 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha3-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-256 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha3-384 2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-384 2.3.6
ecdsa-sha3-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-512 2.3.6
ecdsa-whirlpool 2007/05/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-whirlpool 2.3.5
ecies-kem 2010/xmlsec-ghc#ecies-kem [GENERIC]
ECKeyValue 2009/xmldsig11#ECKeyValue [XMLDSIG11]
eddsa-ed25519 2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519 2.3.12
eddsa-ed25519ctx 2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519ctx 2.3.12
eddsa-ed25519ph 2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519ph 2.3.12
eddsa-ed448 2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448 2.3.12
eddsa-ed448ph 2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448ph 2.3.12
enveloped-signature 2000/09/xmldsig#enveloped-signature [RFC3275]
esign-sha1 2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1 2.3.7
esign-sha224 2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha224 2.3.7
esign-sha256 2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha256 2.3.7
esign-sha384 2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha384 2.3.7
esign-sha512 2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha512 2.3.7
generic-hybrid 2010/xmlsec-ghc#generic-hybrid [GENERIC]
hkdf 2021/04/xmldsig-more#hkdf 2.8.1
hmac-md5 2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5 2.2.1
hmac-ripemd160 2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-ripemd160 2.2.3
hmac-sha1 2000/09/xmldsig#hmac-sha1 [RFC3275]
hmac-sha224 2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha224 2.2.2
hmac-sha256 2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha256 2.2.2
hmac-sha384 2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha384 2.2.2
hmac-sha512 2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha512 2.2.2
KeyName 2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyName 3.2
KeyValue 2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyValue 3.2
kw-aes128 2001/04/xmlenc#kw-aes128 [XMLENC11]
kw-aes128-pad 2009/xmlenc11#kw-aes-128-pad [XMLENC11]
kw-aes192 2001/04/xmlenc#kw-aes192 [XMLENC11]
kw-aes192-pad 2009/xmlenc11#kw-aes-192-pad [XMLENC11]
kw-aes256 2001/04/xmlenc#kw-aes256 [XMLENC11]
kw-aes256-pad 2009/xmlenc11#kw-aes-256-pad [XMLENC11]
kw-camellia128 2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128 2.6.3
kw-camellia192 2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia192 2.6.3
kw-camellia256 2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia256 2.6.3
kw-seed128 2007/05/xmldsig-more#kw-seed128 2.6.6
md2-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#md2-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
md5 2001/04/xmldsig-more#md5 2.1.1
md5-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#md5-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#MGF1 2.3.9
mgf1sha1 2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha1 [XMLENC11]
mgf1sha224 2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha224 [XMLENC11]
mgf1sha256 2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha256 [XMLENC11]
mgf1sha384 2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha384 [XMLENC11]
mgf1sha512 2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha512 [XMLENC11]
MgmtData 2000/09/xmldsig#MgmtData [XMLDSIG11]
minimal 2000/09/xmldsig#minimal 2.4
pbkdf2 2009/xmlenc11#pbkdf2 [XMLENC11]
PGPData 2000/09/xmldsig#PGPData [XMLDSIG11]
PKCS7signedData 2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedData 3.1
PKCS7signedData 2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedData 3.2
poly1305 2021/04/xmldsig-more#poly1305 2.2.4
psec-kem 2001/04/xmldsig-more#psec-kem 2.6.4
rawPGPKeyPacket 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPGPKeyPacket 3.2
rawPKCS7signedData 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPKCS7signedData 3.2
rawSPKISexp 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawSPKISexp 3.2
rawX509Certificate 2000/09/xmldsig#rawX509Certificate [RFC3275]
rawX509CRL 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawX509CRL 3.2
RetrievalMethod 2001/04/xmldsig-more#RetrievalMethod 3.2
ripemd128-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#ripemd128-rsa-MGF1
2.3.10
ripemd160 2001/04/xmlenc#ripemd160 [XMLENC11]
ripemd160-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#ripemd160-rsa-MGF1
2.3.10
rsa-1_5 2001/04/xmlenc#rsa-1_5 [XMLENC11]
rsa-md5 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5 2.3.1
rsa-oaep 2009/xmlenc11#rsa-oaep [XMLENC11]
rsa-oaep-mgf1p 2001/04/xmlenc#rsa-oaep-mgf1p [XMLENC11]
rsa-pss 2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-pss 2.3.9
rsa-ripemd160 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-ripemd160 2.3.5
rsa-sha1 2000/09/xmldsig#rsa-sha1 [RFC3275]
rsa-sha224 2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224 {Bad} 2.3.11
rsa-sha224 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224 2.3.11
rsa-sha256 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256 2.3.2
rsa-sha384 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384 2.3.3
rsa-sha512 2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512 2.3.4
rsa-whirlpool 2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-whirlpool 2.3.5
rsaes-kem 2010/xmlsec-ghc#rsaes-kem [GENERIC]
RSAKeyValue 2000/09/xmldsig#RSAKeyValue [XMLDSIG11]
seed128-cbc 2007/05/xmldsig-more#seed128-cbc 2.6.5
sha1 2000/09/xmldsig#sha1 [RFC3275]
sha1-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha1-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha224 2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha224 2.1.2
sha224-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha224-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha256 2001/04/xmlenc#sha256 [XMLENC11]
sha256-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha256-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha3-224 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224 2.1.5
sha3-224-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha3-256 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-256 2.1.5
sha3-256-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-256-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha3-384 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-384 2.1.5
sha3-384-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-384-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha3-512 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-512 2.1.5
sha3-512-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-512-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha384 2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384 2.1.3
sha384-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha384-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
sha512 2001/04/xmlenc#sha512 [XMLENC11]
sha512-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha512-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10
siphash-2-4 2021/04/xmldsig-more#siphash-2-4 2.2.5
SPKIData 2000/09/xmldsig#SPKIData [XMLDSIG11]
tripledes-cbc 2001/04/xmlenc#tripledes-cbc [XMLENC11]
whirlpool 2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool 2.1.4
whirlpool-rsa-MGF1 2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool-rsa-MGF1
2.3.10
WithComments 2006/12/xmlc14n11#WithComments [CANON11]
WithComments TR/2001/06/xml-exc-c14n#WithComments
[XCANON]
WithComments TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#WithComments
[CANON10]
x25519 2021/04/xmldsig-more#x25519 2.7.1
x448 2021/04/xmldsig-more#x448 2.7.1
X509Data 2000/09/xmldsig#X509Data [XMLDSIG11]Okay bestie, the fragment list keeps going with the XMSS and XMSS^MT entries, plus xptr at the end 💜
xmss-sha2-10-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-192 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-10-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-256 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-10-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-512 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-16-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-192 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-16-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-256 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-16-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-512 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-20-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-192 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-20-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-256 2.2.6
xmss-sha2-20-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-512 2.2.6
xmss-shake-10-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-10-256 2.2.6
xmss-shake-10-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-10-512 2.2.6
xmss-shake-16-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-16-256 2.2.6
xmss-shake-16-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-16-512 2.2.6
xmss-shake-20-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-20-256 2.2.6
xmss-shake-20-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-20-512 2.2.6
xmss-shake256-10-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-10-192
2.2.6
xmss-shake256-10-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-10-256
2.2.6
xmss-shake256-16-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-16-192
2.2.6
xmss-shake256-16-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-16-256
2.2.6
xmss-shake256-20-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-20-192
2.2.6
xmss-shake256-20-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-20-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-20-2-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-20-2-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-20-2-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-20-4-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-20-4-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-20-4-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-2-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-2-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-2-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-4-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-4-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-4-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-8-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-8-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-40-8-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-3-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-3-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-3-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-6-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-6-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-6-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-12-192 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-192
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-12-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-sha2-60-12-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-20-2-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-2-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-20-2-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-2-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-20-4-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-4-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-20-4-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-4-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-40-2-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-2-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-40-2-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-2-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-40-4-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-4-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-40-4-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-4-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-40-8-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-8-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-40-8-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-8-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-60-3-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-3-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-60-3-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-3-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-60-6-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-6-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-60-6-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-6-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-60-12-256 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-12-256
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake-60-12-512 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-12-512
2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-20-2-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-2-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-20-2-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-2-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-20-4-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-4-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-20-4-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-4-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-40-2-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-2-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-40-2-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-2-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-40-4-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-4-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-40-4-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-4-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-40-8-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-8-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-40-8-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-8-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-60-3-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-3-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-60-3-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-3-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-60-6-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-6-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-60-6-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-6-256 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-60-12-192
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-12-192 2.2.6
xmssmt-shake256-60-12-256
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-12-256 2.2.6
xptr 2001/04/xmldsig-more#xptr 2.5.1
--------- ---- --------
Fragment URI Sec/DocHeads up: the initial "http://www.w3.org/" part of each URI is left out of the table above, so add it back when you look things up 🌸
4.2. Index by URI 🔗
The initial "http://www.w3.org/" part is left out of the list below too, and "{Bad}" marks a Bad value that got in by accident in [RFC6931]. Implementations SHOULD only generate the correct URI, but they SHOULD understand both the correct and the erroneous one. See also Appendix B 🎀
URI Sec/Doc Type
---- -------- ------
2000/09/xmldsig#base64 [RFC3275] Transform
2000/09/xmldsig#DSAKeyValue [RFC3275] Retrieval type
2000/09/xmldsig#dsa-sha1 [RFC3275] SignatureMethod
2000/09/xmldsig#enveloped-signature [RFC3275] Transform
2000/09/xmldsig#hmac-sha1 [RFC3275] SignatureMethod
2000/09/xmldsig#MgmtData [RFC3275] Retrieval type
2000/09/xmldsig#minimal 2.4 Canonicalization
2000/09/xmldsig#PGPData [RFC3275] Retrieval type
2000/09/xmldsig#rawX509Certificate [RFC3275] Retrieval type
2000/09/xmldsig#rsa-sha1 [RFC3275] SignatureMethod
2000/09/xmldsig#RSAKeyValue [RFC3275] Retrieval type
2000/09/xmldsig#sha1 [RFC3275] DigestAlgorithm
2000/09/xmldsig#SPKIData [RFC3275] Retrieval type
2000/09/xmldsig#X509Data [RFC3275] Retrieval typeThe URI index is basically a giant spreadsheet, and I'm here for it 🎀 Here's the rest of it, all the way down the list 🦋
2001/04/xmldsig-more#arcfour 2.6.1 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia128-cbc 2.6.2 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia192-cbc 2.6.2 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#camellia256-cbc 2.6.2 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha1 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha224 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha256 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha384 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha512 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha1 2.3.7 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha224 2.3.7 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha256 2.3.7 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha384 2.3.7 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#esign-sha512 2.3.7 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-md5 2.2.1 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-ripemd160 2.2.3 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha224 2.2.2 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha256 2.2.2 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha384 2.2.2 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#hmac-sha512 2.2.2 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyName 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#KeyValue 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia128 2.6.3 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia192 2.6.3 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#kw-camellia256 2.6.3 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#md5 2.1.1 DigestAlgorithm
2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedData 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#psec-kem 2.6.4 EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPGPKeyPacket 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawPKCS7signedData 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawSPKISexp 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rawX509CRL 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#RetrievalMethod 3.2 Retrieval type
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-md5 2.3.1 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224 2.3.11 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha256 2.3.2 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha384 2.3.3 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha512 2.3.4 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-ripemd160 2.3.5 SignatureMethod
2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha224 2.1.2 DigestAlgorithm
2001/04/xmldsig-more#sha384 2.1.3 DigestAlgorithm
2001/04/xmldsig-more#xptr 2.5.1 Transform
2001/04/xmldsig-more#PKCS7signedData 3.1 KeyInfo child
2001/04/xmlenc#aes128-cbc [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#aes192-cbc [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#aes256-cbc [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#dh [XMLENC11] AgreementMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#kw-aes128 [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#kw-aes192 [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#kw-aes256 [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#ripemd160 [XMLENC11] DigestAlgorithm
2001/04/xmlenc#rsa-1_5 [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#rsa-oaep-mgf1p [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2001/04/xmlenc#sha256 [XMLENC11] DigestAlgorithm
2001/04/xmlenc#sha512 [XMLENC11] DigestAlgorithm
2001/04/xmlenc#tripledes-cbc [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2002/06/xmldsig-filter2 [XPATH] Transform
2002/07/decrypt#XML [DECRYPT] Transform
2002/07/decrypt#Binary [DECRYPT] Transform
2006/12/xmlc12n11# {Bad} [CANON11] Canonicalization
2006/12/xmlc14n11# [CANON11] Canonicalization
2006/12/xmlc14n11#WithComments [CANON11] Canonicalization
2007/05/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-ripemd160 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-whirlpool 2.3.5 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#kw-seed128 2.6.6 EncryptionMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#md2-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#md5-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#MGF1 2.3.9 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#ripemd128-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#ripemd160-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-pss 2.3.9 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224 {Bad} 2.3.11 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-whirlpool 2.3.5 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#seed128-cbc 2.6.5 EncryptionMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha1-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha224-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha256-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224 2.1.5 DigestAlgorithm
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-224-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-256 2.1.5 DigestAlgorithm
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-256-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-384 2.1.5 DigestAlgorithm
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-384-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-512 2.1.5 DigestAlgorithm
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha3-512-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha384-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#sha512-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool 2.1.4 DigestAlgorithm
2007/05/xmldsig-more#whirlpool-rsa-MGF1 2.3.10 SignatureMethod
2009/xmlenc11#kw-aes-128-pad [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmlenc11#kw-aes-192-pad [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmlenc11#kw-aes-256-pad [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmldsig11#dsa-sha256 [XMLDSIG11] SignatureMethod
2009/xmldsig11#ECKeyValue [XMLDSIG11] Retrieval type
2009/xmldsig11#DEREncodedKeyValue [XMLDSIG11] Retrieval type
2009/xmlenc11#aes128-gcm [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmlenc11#aes192-gcm [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmlenc11#aes256-gcm [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmlenc11#ConcatKDF [XMLENC11] KeyDerivation
2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha1 [XMLENC11] SignatureMethod
2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha224 [XMLENC11] SignatureMethod
2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha256 [XMLENC11] SignatureMethod
2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha384 [XMLENC11] SignatureMethod
2009/xmlenc11#mgf1sha512 [XMLENC11] SignatureMethod
2009/xmlenc11#pbkdf2 [XMLENC11] KeyDerivation
2009/xmlenc11#rsa-oaep [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2009/xmlenc11#ECDH-ES [XMLENC11] AgreementMethod
2009/xmlenc11#dh-es [XMLENC11] EncryptionMethod
2010/xmlsec-ghc#generic-hybrid [GENERIC] Generic Hybrid
2010/xmlsec-ghc#rsaes-kem [GENERIC] Generic Hybrid
2010/xmlsec-ghc#ecies-kem [GENERIC] Generic Hybrid
2021/04/xmldsig-more#chacha20 2.6.7 EncryptionMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#chacha20poly1305 2.6.8 EncryptionMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-224 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-256 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-384 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#ecdsa-sha3-512 2.3.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519ph 2.3.12 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519ctx 2.3.12 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed25519 2.3.12 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448 2.3.12 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#eddsa-ed448ph 2.3.12 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#hkdf 2.8.1 KeyDerivation
2021/04/xmldsig-more#po1y305 2.2.4 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#siphash-2-4 2.2.5 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#x25519 2.7.1 AgreementMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#x448 2.7.1 AgreementMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-10-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-16-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-sha2-20-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-10-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-10-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-16-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-16-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-20-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake-20-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-10-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-10-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-16-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-16-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-20-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmss-shake256-20-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-2-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-20-4-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-2-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-4-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-40-8-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-3-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-6-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-192 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-sha2-60-12-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod 2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-2-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-2-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-4-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-20-4-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-2-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-2-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-4-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-4-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-8-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-40-8-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-3-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-3-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-6-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-6-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-12-256 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake-60-12-512 2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-2-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-2-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-4-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-20-4-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-2-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-2-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-4-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-4-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-8-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-40-8-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-3-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-3-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-6-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-6-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-12-192
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
2021/04/xmldsig-more#xmssmt-shake256-60-12-256
2.2.6 SignatureMethod
TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116 [XPATH] Transform
TR/1999/REC-xslt-19991116 [XSLT] Transform
TR/2001/06/xml-exc-c14n# [XCANON] Canonicalization
TR/2001/06/xml-exc-c14n#WithComments [XCANON] Canonicalization
TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315 [CANON10] Canonicalization
TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#WithComments
[CANON10] Canonicalization
TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502 [SCHEMA] Transform
---- -------- ------
URI Sec/Doc TypeOkay, bestie, the index table keeps going with the XMSSMT SHAKE signature entries, and then the XPath, XSLT, XML canonicalization and XML Schema transforms 💅✨. The leading http://www.w3.org/ part is left off every URI here, so you have to add it back yourself 🦋. The {Bad} marker means a value that got accidentally included in [RFC6931] 🙈. Now, implementations SHOULD only generate the correct URI, but SHOULD understand both the correct and the erroneous one 💖. There's also Appendix B if you want the full story 🌸.
5. Allocation Considerations 🎀
Here we get the W3C and IANA allocation rules, so both the W3C side and the IANA side are covered 🧚.
5.1. W3C Allocation Considerations
It's super easy for people to make their own unique URIs [RFC3986], and if it makes sense, they can get one from the W3C too 💜. So adding new URIs under the XMLSEC prefixes listed below is prohibited, as shown in this table 🚫:
+=========================================+========================+
| URI | Status |
+=========================================+========================+
| http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig# | Frozen by W3C. |
+-----------------------------------------+------------------------+
| http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmldsig-more# | Frozen with RFC 4051. |
+-----------------------------------------+------------------------+
| http://www.w3.org/2007/05/xmldsig-more# | Frozen with [RFC6931]. |
+-----------------------------------------+------------------------+
Table 2The W3C assigned <http://www.w3.org/2021/04/xmldsig-more#> for the new URIs specified in this document 🍓. There are also some <http://www.w3.org/2010/xmlsec-ghc#> URIs in here, because some algorithms from [GENERIC] were included for convenience 🌈.
An "xmldsig-more" URI doesn't mean the algorithms or identifiers have any official W3C or IETF status, and it doesn't mean they're only good for digital signatures 🙈. Right now, dereferencing one of these URIs might or might not give you a temporary placeholder document 🫶. Permission to use these URI prefixes was given by the W3C 👑.
5.2. IANA Considerations
IANA set up a registry called "XML Security URIs" 🗂️✨. Its contents were updated to match Section 4.2 of this document, and each section number in the "Sec/Doc" column got a reference to this RFC added on (so "2.6.4" means "[RFC9231], Section 2.6.4") 💅. Every reference to [RFC6931] in that registry was updated to RFC 9231 🦋.
New entries, including new Types, get added under Specification Required [RFC8126] 📝. For the designated expert, the criteria for inclusion are (1) enough documentation for the algorithm or data type, and the XML syntax for how it's represented and used, to be interoperable, and (2) enough importance, which is normally shown by inclusion in (2a) an approved W3C Note, Proposed Recommendation, or Recommendation, or (2b) an approved RFC 🔥.
Usually the registry will point at a W3C or IETF document that specifies that XML syntax 💜. That document will either describe the algorithm or data type in more detail, or point to another document that does 🧚.
6. Security Considerations 💀
Okay, bestie, this part is serious 😭. This RFC is about documenting the URIs that designate algorithms and some data types used in XML security 🔐. How risky things are depends a lot on the particular algorithm, and the general security considerations for XML security are out of scope here. They live in [XMLDSIG11], [XMLENC11], [CANON10], [CANON11], and [GENERIC] 📚.
Before you even think about using MD5 as a DigestMethod, or HMAC-MD5 or RSA-MD5 as a SignatureMethod, you SHOULD consult [RFC6151] 🚨. Wait, that's a lowercase "should" in my retelling, so here is the original vibe kept honest: [RFC6151] should be consulted before considering the use of MD5 as a DigestMethod or the use of HMAC-MD5 or RSA-MD5 as a SignatureMethod 🙈.
For SHA-1 security considerations, see [RFC6194] 🦋.
Some extra security considerations are given alongside the description of certain algorithms in the body of this document 🌸.
Implementers should be aware that cryptographic algorithms get weaker over time 💀. As new cryptanalysis techniques are developed and computing performance improves, the work factor to break a particular algorithm goes down 📉. So cryptographic implementations should be modular, so new algorithms can be dropped in easily 🧩. Implementers should be ready for the set of mandatory-to-implement algorithms for any particular use to change over time 🔄. This is sometimes called "algorithm agility" [RFC7696] 💖.
7. References ✨
7.1. Normative References ✨
okay bestie, this is the reading list the spec leans on for its normative stuff 📚 every entry is a doc the spec points at, so the names, numbers, DOIs and links stay exactly as written 🔗 here it is, no cap 💅
[FIPS180-4]
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"Secure Hash Standard (SHS)", DOI 10.6028/NIST.FIPS.180-4,
FIPS 180-4, August 2015,
<https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.180-4.pdf>.
[FIPS186-4]
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"Digital Signature Standard (DSS)", FIPS 186-4,
DOI 10.6028/NIST.FIPS.186-4, July 2013,
<https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.186-4.pdf>.
[FIPS202] National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"SHA-3 Standard: Permutation-Based Hash and Extendable-
Output Functions", FIPS 202, DOI 10.6028/NIST.FIPS.202,
August 2015, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
NIST.FIPS.202.pdf>.
[IEEEP1363a]
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, "IEEE
Standard Specifications for Public-Key Cryptography -
Amendment 1: Additional Techniques", IEEE Std 1363a-2004,
2004.
[ISO-10118-3]
ISO, "Information technology -- Security techniques --
Hash-functions -- Part 3: Dedicated hash-functions", ISO/
IEC 10118-3:2004, 2004.
[ISO-18033-2]
ISO, "Information technology -- Security techniques
--Encryption algorithms -- Part 3: Asymmetric ciphers",
ISO/IEC 18033-2:2010, 2010.
[NIST800-208]
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
"Recommendation for Stateful Hash-Based Signature
Schemes", NIST 800-208, DOI 10.6028/NIST.SP.800-208,
October 2020,
<https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/
NIST.SP.800-208.pdf>.
[RC4] Schneier, B., "Applied Cryptography: Protocols,
Algorithms, and Source Code in C, Second Edition", John
Wiley and Sons, New York, NY , 1996.
[RFC1321] Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321,
DOI 10.17487/RFC1321, April 1992,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1321>.
[RFC2104] Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-
Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2104, February 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2104>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2315] Kaliski, B., "PKCS #7: Cryptographic Message Syntax
Version 1.5", RFC 2315, DOI 10.17487/RFC2315, March 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2315>.
[RFC3275] Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo, "(Extensible
Markup Language) XML-Signature Syntax and Processing",
RFC 3275, DOI 10.17487/RFC3275, March 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3275>.
[RFC3394] Schaad, J. and R. Housley, "Advanced Encryption Standard
(AES) Key Wrap Algorithm", RFC 3394, DOI 10.17487/RFC3394,
September 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3394>.
[RFC3713] Matsui, M., Nakajima, J., and S. Moriai, "A Description of
the Camellia Encryption Algorithm", RFC 3713,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3713, April 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3713>.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.
[RFC4050] Blake-Wilson, S., Karlinger, G., Kobayashi, T., and Y.
Wang, "Using the Elliptic Curve Signature Algorithm
(ECDSA) for XML Digital Signatures", RFC 4050,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4050, April 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4050>.
[RFC4055] Schaad, J., Kaliski, B., and R. Housley, "Additional
Algorithms and Identifiers for RSA Cryptography for use in
the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate
and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 4055,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4055, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4055>.
[RFC4269] Lee, H.J., Lee, S.J., Yoon, J.H., Cheon, D.H., and J.I.
Lee, "The SEED Encryption Algorithm", RFC 4269,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4269, December 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4269>.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.
[RFC5869] Krawczyk, H. and P. Eronen, "HMAC-based Extract-and-Expand
Key Derivation Function (HKDF)", RFC 5869,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5869, May 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5869>.
[RFC6234] Eastlake 3rd, D. and T. Hansen, "US Secure Hash Algorithms
(SHA and SHA-based HMAC and HKDF)", RFC 6234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6234, May 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6234>.
[RFC7748] Langley, A., Hamburg, M., and S. Turner, "Elliptic Curves
for Security", RFC 7748, DOI 10.17487/RFC7748, January
2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7748>.
[RFC8017] Moriarty, K., Ed., Kaliski, B., Jonsson, J., and A. Rusch,
"PKCS #1: RSA Cryptography Specifications Version 2.2",
RFC 8017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8017, November 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8017>.
[RFC8032] Josefsson, S. and I. Liusvaara, "Edwards-Curve Digital
Signature Algorithm (EdDSA)", RFC 8032,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8032, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8032>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8391] Huelsing, A., Butin, D., Gazdag, S., Rijneveld, J., and A.
Mohaisen, "XMSS: eXtended Merkle Signature Scheme",
RFC 8391, DOI 10.17487/RFC8391, May 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8391>.
[RFC8439] Nir, Y. and A. Langley, "ChaCha20 and Poly1305 for IETF
Protocols", RFC 8439, DOI 10.17487/RFC8439, June 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8439>.
[SipHash1] Aumasson, J. and D. Bernstein, "SipHash: A Fast Short-
Input PRF", Progress in Cryptology - INDOCRYPT 2012,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 7668, December
2012, <https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34931-7_28>.
[X9.62] American National Standards Institute, Accredited
Standards Committee X9, "Public Key Cryptography for the
Financial Services Industry: The Elliptic Curve Digital
Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)", ANSI X9.62:2005, 2005.
[XMLENC10] Reagle, J. and D. Eastlake 3rd, "XML Encryption Syntax and
Processing", W3C Recommendation, December 2002,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xmlenc-core-20021210/>.
[XMLENC11] Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., Hirsch, F., and T. Roessler,
"XML Encryption Syntax and Processing Version 1.1",
W3C Proposed Recommendation, April 2013,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlenc-core1/>.
[XPointer] Grosso, P., Maler, E., Marsh, J., and N. Walsh, "XPointer
Framework", W3C Recommendation, March 2003,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-xptr-framework-20030325/>.7.2. Informative References ✨
okay bestie, these are the background reads 📚 the whole reference list is here, and I kept every single entry exact so you can go find them yourself 🔍
[CAMELLIA] Aoki, K., Ichikawa, T., Kanda, M., Matsui, M., Moriai, S.,
Nakajima, J., and T. Tokita, "Camellia: A 128-Bit Block
Cipher Suitable for Multiple Platforms -- Design and
Analysis", In Selected Areas in Cryptography, 7th Annual
International Workshop, SAC 2000, August 2000.
[CANON10] Boyer, J., "Canonical XML Version 1.0",
W3C Recommendation, March 2001,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315>.
[CANON11] Boyer, J. and G. Marcy, "Canonical XML Version 1.1",
W3C Recommendation, May 2008,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-c14n11-20080502/>.
[ChaCha] Bernstein, D., "ChaCha, a variant of Salsa20", January
2008, <https://cr.yp.to/chacha/chacha-20080128.pdf>.
[DECRYPT] Hughes, M., Imamura, T., and H. Maruyama, "Decryption
Transform for XML Signature", W3C Recommendation, December
2002,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xmlenc-decrypt-20021210>.
[Err3597] RFC Errata, "Erratum ID 3597", RFC 6931,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid3597>.
[Err3965] RFC Errata, "Erratum ID 3965", RFC 6931,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid3965>.
[Err4004] RFC Errata, "Erratum ID 4004", RFC 6931,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid4004>.
[GENERIC] Nyström, M. and F. Hirsch, "XML Security Generic Hybrid
Ciphers", W3C Working Group Note, April 2013,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlsec-generic-hybrid/>.
[ITU-T-X.660]
ITU-T, "Information technology - Procedures for the
operation of object identifier registration authorities:
General procedures and top arcs of the international
object identifier tree", ITU-T Recommendation X.660, July
2011, <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.660>.
[ITU-T-X.680]
ITU-T, "Information technology - Abstract Syntax Notation
One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation", ITU-T
Recommendation X.680, February 2021,
<https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.680>.
[KECCAK] Bertoni, G., Daeman, J., Peeters, M., and G. Van Assche,
"KECCAK sponge function family", Version 2.1, June 2010,
<https://keccak.team/obsolete/Keccak-main-2.1.pdf>.
[POLY1305] Bernstein, D., "The Poly1305-AES message-authentication
code", March 2005,
<https://cr.yp.to/mac/poly1305-20050329.pdf>.
[RFC3075] Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo, "XML-Signature
Syntax and Processing", RFC 3075, DOI 10.17487/RFC3075,
March 2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3075>.
[RFC3076] Boyer, J., "Canonical XML Version 1.0", RFC 3076,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3076, March 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3076>.
[RFC3092] Eastlake 3rd, D., Manros, C., and E. Raymond, "Etymology
of "Foo"", RFC 3092, DOI 10.17487/RFC3092, April 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3092>.
[RFC3741] Boyer, J., Eastlake 3rd, D., and J. Reagle, "Exclusive XML
Canonicalization, Version 1.0", RFC 3741,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3741, March 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3741>.
[RFC4010] Park, J., Lee, S., Kim, J., and J. Lee, "Use of the SEED
Encryption Algorithm in Cryptographic Message Syntax
(CMS)", RFC 4010, DOI 10.17487/RFC4010, February 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4010>.
[RFC6090] McGrew, D., Igoe, K., and M. Salter, "Fundamental Elliptic
Curve Cryptography Algorithms", RFC 6090,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6090, February 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6090>.
[RFC6151] Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations
for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms",
RFC 6151, DOI 10.17487/RFC6151, March 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151>.
[RFC6194] Polk, T., Chen, L., Turner, S., and P. Hoffman, "Security
Considerations for the SHA-0 and SHA-1 Message-Digest
Algorithms", RFC 6194, DOI 10.17487/RFC6194, March 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6194>.
[RFC6931] Eastlake 3rd, D., "Additional XML Security Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URIs)", RFC 6931,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6931, April 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6931>.
[RFC7465] Popov, A., "Prohibiting RC4 Cipher Suites", RFC 7465,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7465, February 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7465>.
[RFC7696] Housley, R., "Guidelines for Cryptographic Algorithm
Agility and Selecting Mandatory-to-Implement Algorithms",
BCP 201, RFC 7696, DOI 10.17487/RFC7696, November 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7696>.
[SCHEMA] Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., and N. Mendelsohn,
"XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition", W3C
Recommendation REC-xmlschema-1-20041028, 28 October 2004.
Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
Second Edition", W3C Recommendation REC-xmlschema-
2-20041028, 28 October 2004.
[SipHash2] Aumasson, J. and D. Bernstein, "SipHash: A Fast Short-
Input PRF", Department of Computer Science, University of
Illinois at Chicago,
<https://www.aumasson.jp/siphash/siphash.pdf>.
[W3C] "World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)", <https://www.w3.org>.
[XCANON] Boyer, J., Eastlake 3rd, D., and J. Reagle, "Exclusive XML
Canonicalization Version 1.0", W3C Recommendation, July
2002,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xml-exc-c14n-20020718/>.
[XMLDSIG-PROP]
Hirsch, F., "XML Signature Properties", W3C
Recommendation, April 2013,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-properties/>.
[XMLDSIG10]
Bartel, M., Boyer, J., Fox, B., Simon, E., and B.
LaMacchia, "XML Signature Syntax and Processing (Second
Edition)", W3C Recommendation, June 2008,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xmldsig-core-20080610/>.
[XMLDSIG11]
Bartel, M., Boyer, J., Fox, B., Simon, E., and B.
LaMacchia, "XML Signature Syntax and Processing Version
1.1", W3C Proposed Recommendation, April 2013,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core1/>.
[XMLSEC] Eastlake 3rd, D. and K. Niles, "Secure XML: The New Syntax
for Signatures and Encryption", Addison-Wesley (Pearson
Education) ISBN 0-201-75605-6, 2003.
[XMLSECXREF]
Hirsch, F., Roessler, T., and K. Yiu, "XML Security
Algorithm Cross-Reference", W3C Working Group Note, April
2013, <https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlsec-algorithms/>.
[XMSS] IANA, "XMSS: Extended Hash-Based Signatures",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/xmss-extended-hash-
based-signatures>.
[XPATH] Boyer, J., Hughes, M., and J. Reagle, "XML-Signature XPath
Filter 2.0", W3C Recommendation REC-xmldsig-
filter2-20021108, 8 November 2002.
Berglund, A., Boag, S., Chamberlin, D., Fernandez, M.,
Kay, M., Robie, J., and J. Simeon, "XML Path Language
(XPath) 2.0 (Second Edition)", W3C Recommendation REC-
xpath20-20101214, 14 December 2010.
[XSLT] Kay, M., "XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 2.0", W3C
Recommendation, Second Edition, March 2021,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/>.Appendix A. Changes from RFC 6931 🎀
the glow-up log 💅 here's everything that changed from RFC 6931 to this doc, lowkey a satisfying read ✨
The following changes have been made in [RFC6931] to produce this document.
- Cleaned house 🧹 The Appendix on Changes from RFC 4051 got deleted, since those changes were already folded into [RFC6931]. The reference to RFC 4051 and to the one Errata against RFC 4051 got removed too.
- Fixed three errata 🔥 Fixed [Err3597], [Err3965], and [Err4004]. If [RFC6931] had an erroneous URI, that URI is still listed in the indices, and it's stated that implementations SHOULD only generate the correct URI but SHOULD understand both the correct and erroneous URI. (the bad one stays so nobody gets confused, iykyk 🫶)
- New algorithms just dropped 🦋 These were added:
+=========+==========================+
| Section | Algorithm(s) |
+=========+==========================+
| 2.2.4 | Poly1305 |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.2.5 | SipHash-2-4 |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.2.6 | XMSS and XMSSMT |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.3.6 | ECDSA with SHA3 |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.3.12 | Edwards-Curve Signatures |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.6.7 | ChaCha20 |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.6.8 | ChaCha20+Poly1305 |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.7.1 | X25519 |
+---------+--------------------------+
| 2.8.1 | HKDF |
+---------+--------------------------+
Table 3- Easier to find 🔍 ECIES-KEM and RSAES-KEM are now listed in Section 2.6.4, so they're easier to spot, even though the URI for them is specified in [GENERIC].
- Refs got a refresh 📚 The references for [GENERIC] and FIPS 186 were updated, and appropriate references were added.
- Examples 🧁 Some XML examples were added.
- Polish ✨ Minor typos got fixed and editorial changes were made.
- Vocab boost 🌸 A number of acronyms were added to Section 1.2.
Appendix B. Bad URIs 🙈
heads up, this one's about the wrong URIs that slipped through 💀
[RFC6931] included two bad URIs, shown below. "{Bad}" in the indexes (Sections 4.1 and 4.2) marks such a bad value. Implementations SHOULD only generate the correct URI but SHOULD understand both the correct and erroneous URI.
2006/12/xmlc12n11#This one shows up in the indices (Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of [RFC6931]) when it should be "2006/12/xmlc14n11#" (i.e., the "12" inside "xmlc12n11" should have been "14"). This is [Err3965] and it's corrected in this document. 💖
2007/05/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224This one shows up in the indices (Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of [RFC6931]) when it should be "2001/04/xmldsig-more#rsa-sha224". This is [Err4004] and it's corrected in this document. 🫶
Acknowledgements 🫶
Huge thank-yous to everyone who reported errata against [RFC6931] or helped with this document, listed alphabetically 💖:
Roman Danyliw, Pim van der Eijk, Frederick Hirsch, Benjamin Kaduk,
Alexey Melnikov, Gayle Noble, Axel Puhlmann, Juraj Somorovsky,
Peter Yee, and Annie Yousar.Next, the people who contributed to [RFC6931], the document this one is built on, also listed alphabetically 🌸:
Benoit Claise, Adrian Farrel, Stephen Farrell, Ernst Giessmann,
Frederick Hirsch, Björn Höhrmann, Russ Housley, Satoru Kanno,
Charlie Kaufman, Konrad Lanz, HwanJin Lee, Barry Leiba, Peter
Lipp, Subramanian Moonesamy, Thomas Roessler, Hanseong Ryu, Peter
Saint-Andre, and Sean Turner.And the contributors to RFC 4051 get their flowers too 🌷✨:
Glenn Adams, Joel Halpern, Russ Housley, Merlin Hughs, Gregor
Karlinger, Brian LaMachia, Shiho Moriai, and Joseph Reagle.Everyone on these lists is literally iconic 👑 Thank you all!
Author's Address 💌
Here's how to reach the author, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd 🦋:
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
Futurewei Technologies, Inc.
2386 Panoramic Circle
Apopka, FL 32703
United States of America
Phone: +1-508-333-2270
Email: d3e3e3@gmail.com📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc9231 2022-07
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms