draft-foudil-securitytxt-01.txt

Network Working Group                                          E. Foudil
Internet-Draft                                         December 03, 2017
Intended status: Informational
Expires: June 6, 2018


                   A Method for Web Security Policies
                      draft-foudil-securitytxt-01

Abstract

   When security risks in web services are discovered by independent
   security researchers who understand the severity of the risk, they
   often lack the channels to properly disclose them.  As a result,
   security issues may be left unreported. security.txt defines a
   standard to help organizations define the process for security
   researchers to securely disclose security vulnerabilities.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

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

   This Internet-Draft will expire on June 6, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of




Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  The Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Comments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Separate Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  Contact:  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.4.  Encryption: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.5.  Signature:  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.6.  Acknowledgement:  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.7.  Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   3.  Location of the security.txt file . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  Web-based services  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  File systems  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.3.  Internal hosts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.4.  Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  File Format Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.1.  Well-Known URIs registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.2.  Registry for security.txt Header Fields . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     8.3.  URIs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

1.1.  Motivation

   Many security researchers encounter situations where they are unable
   to responsibly disclose security issues to companies because there is
   no course of action laid out. security.txt is designed to help assist
   in this process by making it easier for companies to designate the
   preferred steps for researchers to take when trying to reach out.

   As per section 4 of [RFC2142], there is an existing convention of
   using the SECURITY@domain [1] email address for communications
   regarding security issues.  That convention provides only a single,
   email-based channel of communication for security issues per domain,




Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   and does not provide a way for domain owners to publish information
   about their security disclosure policies.

   In this document, we propose a richer, machine-parsable and more
   extensible way for companies to communicate information about their
   security disclosure policies, which is not limited to email and also
   allows for additional features such as encryption.

1.2.  Terminology

   In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
   "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY",
   and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

2.  The Specification

   security.txt is a text file that should be located under the /.well-
   known/ path ("/.well-known/security.txt") [RFC5785] for web
   properties.  For file systems and version control repositories a
   .security.txt file should be placed in the root directory.  This text
   file contains 4 directives with different values.  The "directive" is
   the first part of a field all the way up to the colon ("Contact:").
   Directives are case-insensitive.  The "value" comes after the
   directive ("https://example.com/security").  A "field" always
   consists of a directive and a value ("Contact: https://example.com/
   security").  A security.txt file can have an unlimited number of
   fields.  It is important to note that you need a separate line for
   every field.  One MUST NOT chain multiple values for a single
   directive.  Everything MUST be in a separate field.

   A security.txt file only applies to the domain, subdomain, IPv4 or
   IPv6 address it is located in.

   # The following only applies to example.com.
   https://example.com/.well-known/security.txt

   # This only applies to subdomain.example.com.
   https://subdomain.example.com/.well-known/security.txt

   # This security.txt file applies to 192.0.2.0.
   http://192.0.2.0/.well-known/security.txt

2.1.  Comments

   Comments can be added using the # symbol:






Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   <CODE BEGINS>
   # This is a comment.
   <CODE ENDS>

   You MAY use one or more comments as descriptive text immediately
   before the field.  Parsers can then associate the comments with the
   respective field.

2.2.  Separate Fields

   A separate line is required for every new value and field.  You MUST
   NOT chain everything in to a single field.  Every line must end with
   a line feed character (%x0A).

2.3.  Contact:

   Add an address that researchers MAY use for reporting security
   issues.  The value can be an email address, a phone number and/or a
   security page with more information.  The "Contact:" directive MUST
   always be present in a security.txt file.  URIs SHOULD be loaded over
   HTTPS.  Security email addresses SHOULD use the conventions defined
   in section 4 of [RFC2142], but there is no requirement for this
   directive to be an email address.

   The precedence is in listed order.  The first field is the preferred
   method of contact.  In the example below, the e-mail address is the
   preferred method of contact.

   <CODE BEGINS>
   Contact: security@example.com
   Contact: +1-201-555-0123
   Contact: https://example.com/security
   <CODE ENDS>

2.4.  Encryption:

   This directive allows you to add your key for encrypted
   communication.  You MUST NOT directly add your key.  The value MUST
   be a link to a page which contains your key.  Keys SHOULD be loaded
   over HTTPS.

   <CODE BEGINS>
   Encryption: https://example.com/pgp-key.txt
   <CODE ENDS>







Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


2.5.  Signature:

   In order to ensure the authenticty of the security.txt file one
   SHOULD use the "Signature:" directive, which allows you to link to an
   external signature or to directly include the signature in the file.
   External signature files should be named "security.txt.sig" and also
   be placed under the /.well-known/ path.

   Here is an example of an external signature file.

   <CODE BEGINS>
   Signature: https://example.com/.well-known/security.txt.sig
   <CODE ENDS>

   Here is an example inline signature.

   <CODE BEGINS>
   Signature:
   -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

   ...
   -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
   <CODE ENDS>

2.6.  Acknowledgement:

   This directive allows you to link to a page where security
   researchers are recognized for their reports.  The page should list
   individuals or companies that disclosed security vulnerabilities and
   worked with you to remediate the issue.

   <CODE BEGINS>
   Acknowledgement: https://example.com/hall-of-fame.html
   <CODE ENDS>

   Example security acknowledgements page:

   We would like to thank the following researchers:

   (2017-04-15) Frank Denis - Reflected cross-site scripting
   (2017-01-02) Alice Quinn  - SQL injection
   (2016-12-24) John Buchner - Stored cross-site scripting
   (2016-06-10) Anna Richmond - A server configuration issue








Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


2.7.  Example

   <CODE BEGINS>
   # Our security address
   Contact: security@example.com

   # Our PGP key
   Encryption: https://example.com/pgp-key.txt

   # Our security acknowledgements page
   Acknowledgement: https://example.com/hall-of-fame.html

   # Verify this security.txt file
   Signature: https://example.com/.well-known/security.txt.sig
   <CODE ENDS>

3.  Location of the security.txt file

3.1.  Web-based services

   Web-based services SHOULD place the security.txt file under the
   /.well-known/ path; e.g. https://example.com/.well-known/
   security.txt.

3.2.  File systems

   File systems SHOULD place the security.txt file under the root
   directory; e.g. /.security.txt, C:.security.txt.

   <CODE BEGINS>
   .
   &#9500;&#9472;&#9472; .security.txt
   &#9500;&#9472;&#9472; example-directory-1
   &#9500;&#9472;&#9472; example-directory-2
   &#9500;&#9472;&#9472; example-directory-3
   &#9492;&#9472;&#9472; example-file
   <CODE ENDS>

3.3.  Internal hosts

   A .security.txt file SHOULD be placed in the root directory of an
   internal host to trigger incident response.

3.4.  Extensibility

   Like many other formats and protocols, this format may need to be
   extended over time to fit the ever-changing landscape of the
   Internet.  Therefore, extensibility is provided via an IANA registry



Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   for headers fields as defined in Section 6.2.  Any fields registered
   via that process MUST be considered optional.  In order to encourage
   extensibility and interoperability, implementors MUST ignore any
   fields they do not explicitly support.

4.  File Format Description

   The expected file format of the security.txt file is plain text as
   defined in section 4.1.3 of [RFC2046] and encoded in UTF-8.

   The following is an ABNF definition of the security.txt format, using
   the conventions defined in [RFC5234].

   body = *line (contact-field eol) *line

   line = *1(field / comment) eol

   eol = *WSP [CR] LF

   field = contact-field / encryption-field / acknowledgement-field /
   ext-field

   fs = ":"

   comment = "#" *(WSP / VCHAR / %xA0-E007F)

   contact-field = "Contact" fs SP (email / uri / phone)

   email = <Email address as per [RFC5322]>

   phone = "+" *1(DIGIT / "-" / "(" / ")" / SP)

   uri = <URI as per [RFC3986]>

   encryption-field = "Encryption" fs SP uri

   acknowledgement-field = "Acknowledgement" fs SP uri

   ext-field = field-name fs SP unstructured

   field-name = <as per section 3.6.8 of [RFC5322]>

   unstructured = <as per section 3.2.5 of [RFC5322]>

   "ext-field" refers to extension fields, which are discussed in
   Section 3.4





Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 7]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


5.  Security considerations

   Companies creating security.txt files will need to take several
   security-related issues into consideration.  These include exposure
   of sensitive information and attacks where limited access to a server
   could grant the ability to modify the contents of the security.txt
   file or affect how it is served.

   As stated in Section 2.4, keys specified using the "Encryption:"
   directive SHOULD be loaded over HTTPS.

   To ensure the authenticity of the security.txt file one should sign
   the file and include the signature using the "Signature:" directive.

6.  IANA Considerations

   example.com is used in this document following the uses indicated in
   [RFC2606].

   192.0.2.0 is used in this document following the uses indicated in
   [RFC5735].

6.1.  Well-Known URIs registry

   The "Well-Known URIs" registry should be updated with the following
   additional value (using the template from [RFC5785]):

   URI suffix: security.txt

   Change controller: IETF

   Specification document(s): this document

6.2.  Registry for security.txt Header Fields

   IANA is requested to create the "security.txt Header Fields" registry
   in accordance with [RFC8126].  This registry will contain header
   fields for use in security.txt files, defined by this specification.

   New registrations or updates MUST be published in accordance with the
   "Specification Required" guidelines as described in section 4.6 of
   [RFC8126].  Any new field thus registered is considered optional by
   this specification unless a new version of this specification is
   published.

   New registrations and updates MUST contain the following information:

   1.  Name of the field being registered or updated



Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 8]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   2.  Short description of the field

   3.  Whether the field can appear more than once

   4.  The document in which the specification of the field is published

   5.  New or updated status, which MUST be one of: current: The field
       is in current use deprecated: The field is in current use but its
       use is discouraged historic: The field is no longer in current
       use

   An update may make a notation on an existing registration indicating
   that a registered field is historic or deprecated if appropriate.

   The initial registry contains these values:

   Field Name: Acknowledgment
   Description: link to page where security researchers are recognized
   Multiple Appearances: Yes
   Published in: this document
   Status: current

   Field Name: Contact
   Description: contact information to use for reporting security issues
   Multiple Appearances: Yes
   Published in: this document
   Status: current

   Field Name: Encryption
   Description: link to a key to be used for encrypted communication
   Multiple Appearances: Yes
   Published in: this document
   Status: current

   Field Name: Signature
   Description: signature used to verify the authenticity of the file
   Multiple Appearances: No
   Published in: this document
   Status: current

7.  Contributors

   The editor would like to acknowledge the help provided during the
   development of this document by the following individuals:

   o  Tom Hudson helped writing the "File Format Description" and wrote
      several security.txt parsers.




Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                  [Page 9]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   o  Joel Margolis was a big help when it came to wording this document
      appropriately.

   o  Jobert Abma for raising issues and concerns that might arise when
      using certain directives.

   o  Gerben Janssen van Doorn for reviewing this document multiple
      times.

   o  Austin Heap for helping improve the Internet drafts.

   o  Justin Calmus was always there to answer questions related to
      writing this document.

   o  Casey Ellis had several ideas related to security.txt that helped
      shape security.txt itself.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2046]  Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
              Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996, <https://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc2046>.

   [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>.

   [RFC2142]  Crocker, D., "Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and
              Functions", RFC 2142, DOI 10.17487/RFC2142, May 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2142>.

   [RFC2606]  Eastlake 3rd, D. and A. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level DNS
              Names", BCP 32, RFC 2606, DOI 10.17487/RFC2606, June 1999,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2606>.

   [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>.

   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
              Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008, <https://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc5234>.



Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                 [Page 10]

Internet-Draft     A Method for Web Security Policies      December 2017


   [RFC5322]  Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008, <https://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc5322>.

   [RFC5735]  Cotton, M. and L. Vegoda, "Special Use IPv4 Addresses",
              RFC 5735, DOI 10.17487/RFC5735, January 2010,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5735>.

   [RFC5785]  Nottingham, M. and E. Hammer-Lahav, "Defining Well-Known
              Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)", RFC 5785,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5785, April 2010, <https://www.rfc-
              editor.org/info/rfc5785>.

8.2.  Informative References

   [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>.

8.3.  URIs

   [1] mailto:SECURITY@domain

Author's Address

   Edwin Foudil

   Email: contact@edoverflow.com






















Foudil                    Expires June 6, 2018                 [Page 11]