RFC 9549: Internationalization Updates to RFC 5280
- R. Housley
Abstract
The updates to RFC 5280 described in this document provide alignment
with the 2008 specification for Internationaliz
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.¶
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.¶
Information about the current status of this document, any
errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English.¶
1. Introduction
This document updates the Introduction in Section 1, the Name Constraints
certificate extension discussion in Section 4.2.1.10, and the Processing Rules
for Internationaliz
An IDN in Unicode (native character) form contains at least one U-label [RFC5890]. IDNs are carried in certificates in ACE-encoded form. That is, all U-labels within an IDN are converted to A-labels. Conversion of a U-label to an A-label is described in [RFC5891].¶
The GeneralName structure supports many different name forms, including
otherName for extensibility. RFC 8398 [RFC8398] specifies the
SmtpUTF8Mailbox for internationaliz
Note that Internationaliz
Note that characters in the Unicode Category "Symbol, Other" (So) are specifically not included in IDNA2003 [RFC3490] or IDNA2008 [RFC5890]; the derived property values for characters in this category are calculated as DISALLOWED. Thus, some characters that are allowed under the Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing [UTS46] are not allowed under this specification. For instance, ♚.example, which contains the Unicode character U+1F0A1 (BLACK CHESS KING), results in a failure under this specification, but it becomes xn‑‑45h.example under [UTS46].¶
1.1. Terminology
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] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
1.2. Changes since RFC 8399
In some cases, [RFC8399] required conversion of A-labels to U-labels
in order to process name constraints for internationaliz
The Introduction provides a warning to implementers about the handling of characters in the Unicode Category "Symbol, Other" (So), which includes emoji characters.¶
2. Updates to RFC 5280
This section provides updates to several paragraphs of [RFC5280]. For clarity, if the entire section is not replaced, then the original text and the replacement text are shown.¶
2.1. Update in the Introduction (Section 1)
This update provides references for IDNA2008.¶
OLD¶
NEW¶
2.2. Update in Name Constraints (Section 4.2.1.10)
This update removes the ability to include constraints for a particular mailbox. This capability was not used, and removing it allows name constraints to apply to email addresses in rfc822Name and SmtpUTF8Mailbox [RFC8398] within otherName.¶
OLD¶
A name constraint for Internet mail addresses MAY specify a particular mailbox, all addresses at a particular host, or all mailboxes in a domain. To indicate a particular mailbox, the constraint is the complete mail address. For example, "root@example .com" indicates the root mailbox on the host "example.com". To indicate all Internet mail addresses on a particular host, the constraint is specified as the host name. For example, the constraint "example.com" is satisfied by any mail address at the host "example.com". To specify any address within a domain, the constraint is specified with a leading period (as with URIs). For example, ".example.com" indicates all the Internet mail addresses in the domain "example.com", but not Internet mail addresses on the host "example.com".¶
NEW¶
A name constraint for Internet mail addresses MAY specify all addresses at a particular host or all mailboxes in a domain. To indicate all Internet mail addresses on a particular host, the constraint is specified as the host name. For example, the constraint "example.com" is satisfied by any mail address at the host "example.com". To specify any address within a domain, the constraint is specified with a leading period (as with URIs). For example, ".example.com" indicates all the Internet mail addresses in the domain "example.com" but not Internet mail addresses on the host "example.com".¶
2.3. Update in IDNs in GeneralName (Section 7.2)
This update aligns with IDNA2008. Since all of Section 7.2 of [RFC5280] is replaced, the OLD text is not provided.¶
NEW¶
Internationaliz
ed Domain Names (IDNs) may be included in certificates and CRLs in the subjectAltName and issuerAltName extensions, name constraints extension, authority information access extension, subject information access extension, CRL distribution points extension, and issuing distribution point extension. Each of these extensions uses the GeneralName type; one choice in GeneralName is the dNSName field, which is defined as type IA5String.¶ IA5String is limited to the set of ASCII characters. To accommodate IDNs, U-labels are converted to A-labels. The A-label is the encoding of the U-label according to the Punycode algorithm [RFC3492] with the ACE prefix "xn--" added at the beginning of the string.¶
When comparing DNS names for equality, conforming implementations MUST perform a case
-insensitive exact match on the entire DNS name. When evaluating name constraints, conforming implementations MUST perform a case -insensitive exact match on a label-by-label basis. As noted in Section 4.2.1.10, any DNS name that may be constructed by adding labels to the left-hand side of the domain name given as the constraint is considered to fall within the indicated subtree.¶ Implementations that have a user interface SHOULD convert IDNs to Unicode for display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels to U-labels for display purposes.¶
Implementation consideration: There are increased memory requirements for IDNs. An IDN ACE label will begin with the four additional characters "xn--", and an IDN can require as many as five ASCII characters to specify a single international character.¶
2.4. Update in IDNs in Distinguished Names (Section 7.3)
This update aligns with IDNA2008.¶
OLD¶
Domain Names may also be represented as distinguished names using domain components in the subject field, the issuer field, the subjectAltName extension, or the issuerAltName extension. As with the dNSName in the GeneralName type, the value of this attribute is defined as an IA5String. Each domainComponent attribute represents a single label. To represent a label from an IDN in the distinguished name, the implementation MUST perform the "ToASCII" label conversion specified in Section 4.1 of RFC 3490. The label SHALL be considered a "stored string". That is, the AllowUnassigned flag SHALL NOT be set.¶
NEW¶
Domain names may also be represented as distinguished names using domain components in the subject field, the issuer field, the subjectAltName extension, or the issuerAltName extension. As with the dNSName in the GeneralName type, the value of this attribute is defined as an IA5String. Each domainComponent attribute represents a single label. To represent a label from an IDN in the distinguished name, the implementation MUST convert all U-labels to A-labels.¶
2.5. Update in Internationalized Electronic Mail Addresses (Section 7.5)
This update aligns with IDNA2008 and [RFC8398]. Since all of Section 7.5 of [RFC5280] is replaced, the OLD text is not provided.¶
NEW¶
Electronic Mail addresses may be included in certificates and CRLs in the subjectAltName and issuerAltName extensions, name constraints extension, authority information access extension, subject information access extension, issuing distribution point extension, or CRL distribution points extension. Each of these extensions uses the GeneralName construct. If the email address includes an IDN but the local-part of the email address can be represented in ASCII, then the email address is placed in the rfc822Name choice of GeneralName, which is defined as type IA5String. If the local-part of the internationaliz
ed email address cannot be represented in ASCII, then the internationaliz ed email address is placed in the otherName choice of GeneralName using the conventions in RFC 8398 [RFC8398].¶ When the host-part contains an IDN, conforming implementations MUST convert all U-labels to A-labels.¶
7.5.1. Local-Part Contains Only ASCII Characters¶
Two email addresses are considered to match if:¶
- 1)
- The local-part of each name is an exact match, AND¶
- 2)
- The host-part of each name matches using a case
-insensitive ASCII comparison.¶ Implementations that have a user interface SHOULD convert the host-part of internationaliz
ed email addresses specified in these extensions to Unicode before display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels to U-labels for display purposes.¶ 7.5.2. Local-Part Contains Non-ASCII Characters¶
When the local-part contains non-ASCII characters, conforming implementations MUST place the internationaliz
ed email address in the SmtpUTF8Mailbox within the otherName choice of GeneralName as specified in Section 3 of RFC 8398 [RFC8398]. Note that the UTF8 encoding of the internationaliz ed email address MUST NOT contain a Byte-Order-Mark (BOM) [RFC3629] to aid comparison. The email address local-part within the SmtpUTF8Mailbox MUST conform to the requirements of [RFC6530] and [RFC6531].¶ Two email addresses are considered to match if:¶
- 1)
- The local-part of each name is an exact match, AND¶
- 2)
- The host-part of each name matches using a case
-insensitive ASCII comparison.¶ Implementations that have a user interface SHOULD convert the host-part of internationaliz
ed email addresses specified in these extensions to Unicode before display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels to U-labels for display purposes.¶
3. Security Considerations
The Security Considerations related to internationaliz
Conforming Certification Authorities (CAs) SHOULD ensure that IDNs are valid according to IDNA2008, which is defined in [RFC5890], [RFC5891], [RFC5892], [RFC5893], [RFC5894], and the updates to these documents. Failure to use valid A-labels may yield a domain name that cannot be correctly represented in the Domain Name System (DNS). In addition, the CA/Browser Forum offers some guidance regarding internal server names in certificates [CABF].¶
An earlier version of this specification [RFC8399] required conversion
of A-labels to U-labels in order to process name constraints for
internationaliz
4. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.¶
5. References
5.1. Normative References
- [RFC2119]
-
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2119 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2119 - [RFC3492]
-
Costello, A., "Punycode: A Bootstring encoding of Unicode for Internationaliz
ed Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)" , RFC 3492, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC3492 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3492 - [RFC3629]
-
Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3629 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3629 - [RFC3987]
-
Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationaliz
ed Resource Identifiers (IRIs)" , RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC3987 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3987 - [RFC4518]
-
Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP): Internationaliz
ed String Preparation" , RFC 4518, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC4518 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4518 - [RFC5280]
-
Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5280 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5280 - [RFC5890]
-
Klensin, J., "Internationaliz
ed Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework" , RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC5890 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5890 - [RFC5891]
-
Klensin, J., "Internationaliz
ed Domain Names in Applications (IDNA): Protocol" , RFC 5891, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC5891 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5891 - [RFC5892]
-
Faltstrom, P., Ed., "The Unicode Code Points and Internationaliz
ed Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)" , RFC 5892, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC5892 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5892 - [RFC5893]
-
Alvestrand, H., Ed. and C. Karp, "Right-to-Left Scripts for Internationaliz
ed Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)" , RFC 5893, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC5893 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5893 - [RFC6530]
-
Klensin, J. and Y. Ko, "Overview and Framework for Internationaliz
ed Email" , RFC 6530, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC6530 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6530 - [RFC6531]
-
Yao, J. and W. Mao, "SMTP Extension for Internationaliz
ed Email" , RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC6531 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6531 - [RFC8174]
-
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8174 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8174 - [RFC8398]
-
Melnikov, A., Ed. and W. Chuang, Ed., "Internationaliz
ed Email Addresses in X.509 Certificates" , RFC 8398, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC8398 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8398
5.2. Informative References
- [CABF]
-
CA/Browser Forum, "Internal Server Names and IP Address Requirements for SSL: Guidance on the Deprecation of Internal Server Names and Reserved IP Addresses provided by the CA/Browser Forum", Version 1.0, , <https://
cabforum >..org /internal -names / - [DDHQ]
-
Datadog Security Labs, "The OpenSSL punycode vulnerability
(CVE , , <https://-2022 -3602 ): Overview, detection, exploitation, and remediation" securitylabs >..datadoghq .com /articles /openssl -november -1 -vulnerabilities / - [RFC3490]
-
Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, "Internationaliz
ing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)" , RFC 3490, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC3490 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3490 - [RFC5894]
-
Klensin, J., "Internationaliz
ed Domain Names for Applications (IDNA): Background, Explanation, and Rationale" , RFC 5894, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC5894 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5894 - [RFC8399]
-
Housley, R., "Internationaliz
ation Updates to RFC 5280" , RFC 8399, DOI 10.17487 , , <https:///RFC8399 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8399 - [UTS46]
-
Davis, M. and M. Suignard, "Unicode Technical Standard #46: Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing", Revision 31, The Unicode Consortium, Mountain View, , <https://
www >..unicode .org /reports /tr46
Acknowledgements
Thanks to David Benjamin and Wei Chuang for identifying the issue and a solution.¶
Thanks to Takahiro Nemoto, John Klensin, Mike Ounsworth, and Orie Steele for their careful review and thoughtful comments.¶