Remote ATtestation ProcedureS P. Howard Internet-Draft Arm Intended status: Informational T. Fossati Expires: 10 October 2025 Linaro 8 April 2025 Concise Selector for Endorsements and Reference Values draft-howard-rats-coserv-01 Abstract In the Remote Attestation Procedures (RATS) architecture, Verifiers require Endorsements and Reference Values to assess the trustworthiness of Attesters. This document specifies the Concise Selector for Endorsements and Reference Values (CoSERV), a structured query/result format designed to facilitate the discovery and retrieval of these artifacts from various providers. CoSERV defines a query language and corresponding result structure using CDDL, which can be serialized in CBOR format, enabling efficient interoperability across diverse systems. About This Document This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://rats- endorsements-distribution.github.io/draft-howard-rats-coserv/draft- howard-rats-coserv.html. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-howard-rats-coserv/. Discussion of this document takes place on the Remote ATtestation ProcedureS Working Group mailing list (mailto:rats@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/. Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats/. Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/rats-endorsements-distribution/draft-howard-rats- coserv. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 1] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 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 https://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 10 October 2025. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2025 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://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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Terminology and Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. CoSERV Information Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. Queries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3. Result Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. CoSERV Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. Common Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3. Query Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3.1. Artifact Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3.2. Environment Selector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.4. Result Set Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.5. Encoding Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.6. Cryptographic Binding Between Query and Result Set . . . 10 4. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.1. Veraison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1. Forming Native Database Queries from CoSERV . . . . . . . 14 Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 2] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 7. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.1. Media Types Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.1.1. application/coserv+cbor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8.1.2. application/coserv+cose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8.2. CoAP Content-Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appendix A. Collated CoSERV CDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 1. Introduction Remote Attestation Procedures (RATS) enable Relying Parties to evaluate the trustworthiness of remote Attesters by appraising Evidence. This appraisal necessitates access to Endorsements and Reference Values, which are often distributed across multiple providers, including hardware manufacturers, firmware developers, and software vendors. The lack of standardized methods for querying and retrieving these artifacts poses challenges in achieving seamless interoperability. The Concise Selector for Endorsements and Reference Values (CoSERV) addresses this challenge by defining a query language and a corresponding result structure for the transaction of artifacts between a provider and a consumer. The query language format provides Verifiers with a standard way to specify the environment characteristics of Attesters, such that the relevant artifacts can be obtained from Endorsers and Reference Value Providers. In turn, the result format allows those Endorsers and Reference Value Providers to package the artifacts within a standard structure. This facilitates the efficient discovery and retrieval of relevant Endorsements and Reference Values from providers, maximising the re-use of common software tools and libraries within the transactions. The CoSERV query language is intended to form the input data type for tools and services that provide access to Endorsements and Reference Values. The CoSERV result set is intended to form the corresponding output data type from those tools and services. This document does not define the complete APIs or interaction models for such tools and services. The scope of this document is limited to the definitions of the query language and the result set only. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 3] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 Both the query language and the result set are designed for extensibility. This addresses the need for a common baseline format to optimise for interoperability and software reuse, while maintaining the flexibility demanded by a dynamic and diverse ecosystem. The environment characteristics of Endorsements and Reference Values are derived from the equivalent concepts in CoRIM [I-D.ietf-rats-corim]. CoSERV therefore borrows heavily from CoRIM, and shares some data types for its fields. And, like CoRIM, the CoSERV schema is defined using CDDL [RFC8610]. A CoSERV query can be serialized in CBOR [STD94] format. 1.1. Terminology and Requirements Language 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. This document uses terms and concepts defined by the RATS architecture. For a complete glossary, see Section 4 of [RFC9334]. This document uses terms and concepts defined by the CoRIM specification. For a complete glossary, see Section 1.1.1 of [I-D.ietf-rats-corim]. This document uses the terms _"actual state"_ and _"reference state"_ as defined in Section 2 of [I-D.ietf-rats-endorsements]. The terminology from CBOR [STD94], CDDL [RFC8610] and COSE [STD96] applies; in particular, CBOR diagnostic notation is defined in Section 8 of [STD94] and Appendix G of [RFC8610]. Terms and concepts are always referenced as proper nouns, i.e., with Capital Letters. 2. CoSERV Information Model 2.1. Overview CoSERV is designed to facilitate query-response transactions between a producer and a consumer. In the RATS model, the producer is either an Endorser or a Reference Value Provider, and the consumer is a Verifier. CoSERV defines a single top-level data type that can be used for both queries and result sets. Queries are authored by the consumer (Verifier), while result sets are authored by the producer (Endorser or Reference Value Provider) in response to the query. A CoSERV data object always contains a query. When CoSERV is used to Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 4] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 express a result set, the query is retained alongside the result set that was yielded by that query. This allows consumers to verify a match between the query that was sent to the producer, and the query that was subsequently returned with the result set. Such verification is useful because it mitigates security threats arising from any untrusted infrastructure or intermediaries that might reside between the producer and the consumer. An example of this is caching in HTTP [STD98] and CoAP [RFC7252]. It might be expensive to compute the result set for a query, which would make caching desirable. However, if caching is managed by an untrusted intermediary, then there is a risk that such an untrusted intermediary might return incorrect results, either accidentally or maliciously. Pairing the original query with each result set provides an end-to-end contract between the consumer and producer, mitigating such risks. The transactional pattern between the producer and the consumer would be that the consumer begins the transaction by authoring a query and sending it to the producer as a CoSERV object. The producer receives the query, computes results, and returns a new CoSERV object formed from the results along with the original query. Notionally, the producer is "adding" the results to the query before sending it back to the consumer. 2.2. Queries The purpose of a query is to allow the consumer (Verifier) to specify the artifacts (Endorsements and Reference Values) that it needs. Consequently, a query corresponds to the environmental characteristics of one or more Attesters. Such environmental characteristics are identical to those used in the information model of CoRIM [I-D.ietf-rats-corim]. In summary, they can include the following: * An individual Attester instance. * A group (identifiable collection) of Attester instances. * A class of Attester, defined by characteristics such as the vendor or model, of which there may be an arbitrary number of instances. To facilitate efficient transactions, a single query can specify either multiple instances, multiple groups or multiple classes. 2.3. Result Sets The result set contains the Endorsements and Reference Values that are needed by the Verifier in order to verify and appraise Evidence from one or more Attesters. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 5] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 3. CoSERV Data Model This section specifies the CBOR data model for CoSERV queries and result sets. CDDL is used to express rules and constraints of the data model for CBOR. These rules must be strictly followed when creating or validating CoSERV data objects. The top-level CoSERV data structure is given by the following CDDL: coserv = { &(profile: 0) => profile &(query: 1) => query ? result-set } profile = oid-type / ~uri 3.1. Common Data Types CoSERV inherits the following types from the CoRIM data model class- map, $class-id-type-choice, $instance-id-type-choice and $group-id- type-choice. The collated CDDL is in Appendix A. 3.2. Profile In common with EAT and CoRIM, CoSERV supports the notion of profiles. As with EAT and CoRIM, profiles are a way to extend or specialize the structure of a generic CoSERV query in order to cater for a specific use case or environment. In a CoSERV query, the profile can be identified by either a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or an Object Identifier (OID). This convention is identical to how EAT profiles are identified using the eat_profile claim as described in Section 4.3.2 of [I-D.ietf-rats-eat]. 3.3. Query Structure The CoSERV query language enables Verifiers to specify the desired characteristics of Endorsements and Reference Values based on the environment in which they are applicable. The top-level structure of a CoSERV query is given by the following CDDL: Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 6] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 query = { &(artifact-type: 0) => artifact-type &(environment-selector: 1) => environment-selector-map } artifact-type = &(endorsed-values: 0) / &(trust-anchors: 1) / &(reference-values: 2) The meanings of these fields are detailed in the following subsections. 3.3.1. Artifact Type The artifact-type field is the foremost discriminator of the query. It is a top-level category selector. Its three permissible values are trust-anchors (codepoint 1), endorsed-values (codepoint 0) and reference-values (codepoint 2). These correspond to the following three categories of endorsement artifact that can be identified in the RATS architecture: * *Trust Anchor* (trust-anchors): A trust anchor is as defined in [RFC6024]. An example of a trust anchor would be the public part of the asymmetric signing key that is used by the Attester to sign Evidence, such that the Verifier is able to verify the cryptographic signature. * *Endorsed Value* (endorsed-values): An endorsed value is as defined in Section 1.1.1 of [I-D.ietf-rats-corim]. * *Reference Value* (reference-values): A reference value is as defined in Section 1.1.1 of [I-D.ietf-rats-corim]. A reference value specifies an individual aspect of the Attester's desired state. Reference values are sometimes informally called "golden values". An example of a reference value would be the expected hash or checksum of a binary firmware or software image running in the Attester's environment. Evidence from the Attester would then include claims about the Attester's actual state, which the Verifier can then compare with the reference values at Evidence appraisal time. It is expected that implementations might choose to store these different categories of artifacts in different top-level stores or database tables. Where this is the case, the artifact-type field serves to narrow the query down to the correct store or table. Even where this is not the case, the discriminator is useful as a filter for the consumer, resulting in an efficiency gain by avoiding the transfer of unwanted data items. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 7] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 3.3.2. Environment Selector The environment selector forms the main body of the query, and its CDDL is given below: environment-selector-map = { selector } selector //= ( &(class: 0) => [ + class-map ] ) selector //= ( &(instance: 1) => [ + $instance-id-type-choice ] ) selector //= ( &(group: 2) => [ + $group-id-type-choice ] ) The environment defines the scope (or scopes) in which the endorsement artifacts are applicable. Given that the consumer of these artifacts is likely to be a Verifier in the RATS model, the typical interpretation of the environment would be that of an Attester that either has produced evidence, or is expected to produce evidence, that the Verifier needs to appraise. The Verifier consequently needs to query the Endorser or Reference Value Provider for artifacts that are applicable in that environment. There are three mutually-exclusive methods for defining the environment within a CoSERV query. Exactly one of these three methods must be used for the query to be valid. All three methods correspond to environments that are also defined within CoRIM. * *Class*: A class is an environment that is expected to be common to a group of similarly-constructed Attesters, who might therefore share the same set of endorsed characteristics. An example of this might be a fleet of computing devices of the same model and manufacturer. * *Instance*: An instance is an environment that is unique to an individual and identifiable Attester, such as a single computing device or component. * *Group*: A group is a collection of common Attester instances that are collected together based on some defined semantics. For example, Attesters may be put into groups for the purpose of anonymity. Although these three environment definitions are mutually-exclusive in a CoSERV query, all three support multiple entries. This is to gain efficiency by allowing the consumer (such as a Verifier) to query for multiple artifacts in a single transaction. For example, where artifacts are being indexed by instance, it would be possible to specify an arbitrary number of instances in a single query, and therefore obtain the artifacts for all of them in a single transaction. Likewise for classes and groups. However, it would not be possible for a single query to specify more than one kind of Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 8] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 environment. For example, it would not be possible to query for both class-level and instance-level artifacts in a single CoSERV transaction. 3.4. Result Set Structure The result set structure is given by the following CDDL: result-set //= ? reference-values result-set //= ? endorsed-values result-set //= ? trust-anchors result-set //= ? $$result-set-extensions reference-values = ( &(rvt: 10) => [ * reference-triple-record ] ) endorsed-values = ( &(evt: 20) => [ * endorsed-triple-record ] &(cet: 21) => [ * conditional-endorsement-triple-record ] ) trust-anchors = ( &(akt: 30) => [ * attest-key-triple-record ] &(tas: 31) => [ * cots ] ) ; ; import CoTS ; cots = "TODO COTS" 3.5. Encoding Requirements Implementations may wish to use serialized CoSERV queries as canonical identifiers for artifact collections. For example, a Reference Value Provider service may wish the cache the results of a CoSERV query to gain efficiency when responding to a future identical query. For these use cases to be effective, it is essential that any given CoSERV query is always serialized to the same fixed sequence of CBOR bytes. Therefore, CoSERV queries MUST always use CBOR deterministic encoding as specified in Section 4.2 of [STD94]. Further, CoSERV queries MUST use CBOR definite-length encoding. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 9] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 3.6. Cryptographic Binding Between Query and Result Set CoSERV is designed to ensure that any result set passed from a producer to a consumer is precisely the result set that corresponds to the consumer's original query. This is the reason why the original query is always included along with the result set in the data model. However, this measure is only sufficient in cases where the conveyance protocol guarantees that CoSERV result sets are always transacted over an end-to-end secure channel without any intermediaries. Wherever this is not the case, producers MUST create an additional cryptographic binding between the query and the result. This is achieved by transacting the result set within a cryptographic envelope, with a signature added by the producer, which is verified by the consumer. A CoSERV data object can be signed using COSE [STD96]. A signed-coserv is a COSE_Sign1 with the following layout: signed-coserv = [ protected: bytes .cbor signed-coserv-protected-hdr unprotected: signed-coserv-unprotected-hdr payload: bytes .cbor coserv signature: bytes ] The payload MUST be the CBOR-encoded CoSERV. signed-coserv-protected-hdr = { 1 => int ; alg 2 => "application/coserv+cbor" / 10000 ; cty * cose.label => cose.values } signed-coserv-unprotected-hdr = { * cose.label => cose.values } cose.label = int / text cose.values = any The protected header MUST include the signature algorithm identifier. The protected header MUST include either the content type application/coserv+cbor or the CoAP Content-Format TBD1. Other header parameters MAY be added to the header buckets, for example a kid that identifies the signing key. 4. Examples This section provides some illustrative examples of valid CoSERV query objects. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 10] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 The following example shows a query for Reference Values scoped by a single class. The artifact-type is set to 2 (reference-values), indicating a query for Reference Values. The profile is given the example value of tag:example.com,2025:cc-platform#1.0.0. Finally, the environment-selector uses the key 0 to select for class, and the value contains a single entry with illustrative settings for the identifier, vendor and model. { / profile / 0: "tag:example.com,2025:cc-platform#1.0.0", / query / 1: { / artifact-type / 0: 2, / reference-values / / environment-selector / 1: { / class / 0: [ { / class-id / 0: 560(h'00112233'), / tagged-bytes / / vendor / 1: "Example Vendor", / model / 2: "Example Model" } ] } } } The next example is similar, but adds a second entry to the set of classes in the environment-map, showing how multiple classes can be queried at the same time. { / profile / 0: "tag:example.com,2025:cc-platform#1.0.0", / query / 1: { / artifact-type / 0: 2, / reference-values / / environment-selector / 1: { / class / 0: [ { / class-id / 0: 560(h'8999786556'), / tagged-bytes / / vendor / 1: "Example Vendor", / model / 2: "Example Model" }, { / class-id / 0: 37(h'31FB5ABF023E4992AA4E95F9C1503BFA') / UUID / } ] } } } Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 11] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 The following example shows a query for Reference Values scoped by instance. Again, the artifact-type is set to 2, and profile is given a demonstration value. The environment-selector now uses the key 1 to select for instances, and the value contains two entries with example instance identifiers. { / profile / 0: "tag:example.com,2025:cc-platform#1.0.0", / query / 1: { / artifact-type / 0: 2, / reference-values / / environment-selector / 1: { / instance / 1: [ 550(h'02DEADBEEFDEAD'), / UEID / 560(h'8999786556') / tagged-bytes / ] } } } 5. Implementation Status // RFC Editor: please remove this section prior to publication. This section records the status of known implementations of the protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942]. The description of implementations in this section is intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may exist. According to [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as they see fit". 5.1. Veraison Responsible Organisation: Veraison (open source project within the Confidential Computing Consortium). Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 12] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 Location: https://github.com/veraison Description: Veraison provides components that can be used to build a Verifier, and also exemplifies adjacent RATS roles such as the Relying Party. There is an active effort to extend Veraison so that it can act in the capacity of an Endorser or Reference Value Provider, showing how CoSERV can be used as a query language for such services. This includes library code to assist with the creation, parsing and manipulation of CoSERV queries. Level of Maturity: This is a proof-of-concept prototype implementation. License: Apache-2.0. Coverage: This implementation covers all aspects of the CoSERV query language. Contact: Thomas Fossati, Thomas.Fossati@linaro.org 6. Security Considerations The CoSERV data type serves an auxiliary function in the RATS architecture. It does not directly convey Evidence, Endorsements, Reference Values, Policies or Attestation Results. CoSERV exists only to facilitate the interactions between the Verifier and the Endorser or Reference Value Provider roles. Consequently, there are fewer security considerations for CoSERV, particularly when compared with data objects such as EAT or CoRIM. Certain security characteristics are desirable for interactions between the Verifier and the Endorser or Reference Value Provider. However, these characteristics would be the province of the specific implementations of these roles, and of the transport protocols in between them. They would not be the province of the CoSERV data object itself. Examples of such desirable characteristics might be: * The Endorser or Reference Value Provider is available to the Verifier when needed. * The Verifier is authorised to query data from the Endorser or Reference Value Provider. * Queries cannot be intercepted or undetectably modified by an entity that is interposed between the Verifier and the Endorser or Reference Value Provider. Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 13] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 6.1. Forming Native Database Queries from CoSERV Implementations should take care when transforming CoSERV queries into native query types that are compatible with their underlying storage technology (such as SQL queries). There is a risk of injection attacks arising from poorly-formed or maliciously-formed CoSERV queries. Implementations must ensure that suitable sanitization procedures are in place when performing such translations. 7. Privacy Considerations A CoSERV query can potentially contain privacy-sensitive information. Specifically, the environment-selector field of the query may reference identifiable Attester instances in some cases. This concern naturally also extends to the data objects that might be returned to the consumer in response to the query, although the specifications of such data objects are beyond the scope of this document. Implementations should ensure that appropriate attention is paid to this. Suitable mitigations include the following: * The use of authenticated secure channels between the producers and the consumers of CoSERV queries and returned artifacts. * Collating Attester instances into anonymity groups, and referencing the groups rather than the individual instances. 8. IANA Considerations // RFC Editor: replace "RFCthis" with the RFC number assigned to this document. 8.1. Media Types Registrations IANA is requested to add the following media types to the "Media Types" registry [IANA.media-types]. +=============+=========================+========================+ | Name | Template | Reference | +=============+=========================+========================+ | coserv+cbor | application/coserv+cbor | Section 3 of RFCthis | +-------------+-------------------------+------------------------+ | coserv+cose | application/coserv+cose | Section 3.6 of RFCthis | +-------------+-------------------------+------------------------+ Table 1: CoSERV Media Types Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 14] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 8.1.1. application/coserv+cbor Type name: application Subtype name: coserv+cbor Required parameters: n/a Optional parameters: "profile" (CoSERV profile in string format. OIDs must use the dotted-decimal notation.) Encoding considerations: binary (CBOR) Security considerations: Section 6 of RFCthis Interoperability considerations: n/a Published specification: RFCthis Applications that use this media type: Verifiers, Endorsers, Reference Value Providers Fragment identifier considerations: The syntax and semantics of fragment identifiers are as specified for "application/cbor". (No fragment identification syntax is currently defined for "application/cbor".) Person & email address to contact for further information: RATS WG mailing list (rats@ietf.org) Intended usage: COMMON Restrictions on usage: none Author/Change controller: IETF Provisional registration: no 8.1.2. application/coserv+cose Type name: application Subtype name: coserv+cose Required parameters: n/a (cose-type is explicitly not supported, as it is understood to be "cose-sign1") Optional parameters: "profile" CoSERV profile in string format. OIDs must use the dotted-decimal notation. Note that the cose- type parameter is explicitly not supported, as it is understood to be "cose-sign1". Encoding considerations: binary Security considerations: Section 6 of RFCthis Interoperability considerations: n/a Published specification: RFCthis Applications that use this media type: Verifiers, Endorsers, Reference Value Providers Fragment identifier considerations: n/a Person and email address to contact for further information: RATS WG mailing list (rats@ietf.org) Intended usage: COMMON Restrictions on usage: none Author/Change controller: IETF Provisional registration? no Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 15] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 8.2. CoAP Content-Formats IANA is requested to register the following Content-Format IDs in the "CoAP Content-Formats" registry, within the "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry group [IANA.core-parameters]: +=========================+================+======+=============+ | Content-Type | Content Coding | ID | Reference | +=========================+================+======+=============+ | application/coserv+cbor | - | TBD1 | Section 3 | | | | | of RFCthis | +-------------------------+----------------+------+-------------+ | application/coserv+cose | - | TBD2 | Section 3.6 | | | | | of RFCthis | +-------------------------+----------------+------+-------------+ Table 2: New CoAP Content Formats If possible, TBD1 and TBD2 should be assigned in the 256..9999 range. 9. References 9.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-rats-corim] Birkholz, H., Fossati, T., Deshpande, Y., Smith, N., and W. Pan, "Concise Reference Integrity Manifest", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-corim-07, 3 March 2025, . [IANA.core-parameters] IANA, "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters", . [IANA.media-types] IANA, "Media Types", . [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 16] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . [RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017, . [RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610, June 2019, . [RFC9334] Birkholz, H., Thaler, D., Richardson, M., Smith, N., and W. Pan, "Remote ATtestation procedureS (RATS) Architecture", RFC 9334, DOI 10.17487/RFC9334, January 2023, . [STD94] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)", STD 94, RFC 8949, DOI 10.17487/RFC8949, December 2020, . [STD96] Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE): Structures and Process", STD 96, RFC 9052, DOI 10.17487/RFC9052, August 2022, . 9.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-rats-eat] Lundblade, L., Mandyam, G., O'Donoghue, J., and C. Wallace, "The Entity Attestation Token (EAT)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-eat-31, 6 September 2024, . [I-D.ietf-rats-endorsements] Thaler, D., Birkholz, H., and T. Fossati, "RATS Endorsements", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- ietf-rats-endorsements-06, 3 March 2025, . Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 17] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 [RFC6024] Reddy, R. and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor Management Requirements", RFC 6024, DOI 10.17487/RFC6024, October 2010, . [RFC7252] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7252, DOI 10.17487/RFC7252, June 2014, . [RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205, RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016, . [STD98] Internet Standard 98, . At the time of writing, this STD comprises the following: Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP Caching", STD 98, RFC 9111, DOI 10.17487/RFC9111, June 2022, . Appendix A. Collated CoSERV CDDL coserv = { &(profile: 0) => profile &(query: 1) => query ? result-set } profile = oid-type / ~uri environment-selector-map = { selector } selector //= ( &(class: 0) => [ + class-map ] ) selector //= ( &(instance: 1) => [ + $instance-id-type-choice ] ) selector //= ( &(group: 2) => [ + $group-id-type-choice ] ) concise-mid-tag = { ? &(language: 0) => text &(tag-identity: 1) => tag-identity-map ? &(entities: 2) => [ + comid-entity-map ] ? &(linked-tags: 3) => [ + linked-tag-map ] &(triples: 4) => triples-map * $$concise-mid-tag-extension } Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 18] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 attest-key-triple-record = [ environment: environment-map key-list: [ + $crypto-key-type-choice ] ? conditions: non-empty< { ? &(mkey: 0) => $measured-element-type-choice, ? &(authorized-by: 1) => [ + $crypto-key-type-choice ] }> ] $class-id-type-choice /= tagged-oid-type $class-id-type-choice /= tagged-uuid-type $class-id-type-choice /= tagged-bytes class-map = non-empty<{ ? &(class-id: 0) => $class-id-type-choice ? &(vendor: 1) => tstr ? &(model: 2) => tstr ? &(layer: 3) => uint ? &(index: 4) => uint }> comid-entity-map = entity-map<$comid-role-type-choice, $$comid-entity-map-extension> $comid-role-type-choice /= &(tag-creator: 0) $comid-role-type-choice /= &(creator: 1) $comid-role-type-choice /= &(maintainer: 2) conditional-endorsement-series-triple-record = [ condition: stateful-environment-record series: [ + conditional-series-record ] ] conditional-series-record = [ selection: [ + measurement-map] addition: [ + measurement-map ] ] COSE_KeySet = [ + COSE_Key ] COSE_Key = { 1 => tstr / int ? 2 => bstr ? 3 => tstr / int ? 4 => [+ (tstr / int) ] ? 5 => bstr * cose-label => cose-value } Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 19] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 cose-label = int / tstr cose-value = any coswid-triple-record = [ environment-map [ + concise-swid-tag-id ] ] concise-swid-tag-id = text / bstr .size 16 $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-pkix-base64-key-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-pkix-base64-cert-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-pkix-base64-cert-path-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-cose-key-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-thumbprint-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-cert-thumbprint-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-cert-path-thumbprint-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-pkix-asn1der-cert-type $crypto-key-type-choice /= tagged-bytes tagged-pkix-base64-key-type = #6.554(tstr) tagged-pkix-base64-cert-type = #6.555(tstr) tagged-pkix-base64-cert-path-type = #6.556(tstr) tagged-thumbprint-type = #6.557(digest) tagged-cose-key-type = #6.558(COSE_KeySet / COSE_Key) tagged-cert-thumbprint-type = #6.559(digest) tagged-cert-path-thumbprint-type = #6.561(digest) tagged-pkix-asn1der-cert-type = #6.562(bstr) domain-dependency-triple-record = [ $domain-type-choice [ + $domain-type-choice ] ] domain-membership-triple-record = [ $domain-type-choice [ + environment-map ] ] conditional-endorsement-triple-record = [ conditions: [ + stateful-environment-record ] endorsements: [ + endorsed-triple-record ] ] $domain-type-choice /= uint $domain-type-choice /= text $domain-type-choice /= tagged-uuid-type $domain-type-choice /= tagged-oid-type Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 20] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 endorsed-triple-record = [ condition: environment-map endorsement: [ + measurement-map ] ] entity-map = { &(entity-name: 0) => $entity-name-type-choice ? &(reg-id: 1) => uri &(role: 2) => [ + role-type-choice ] * extension-socket } $entity-name-type-choice /= text environment-map = non-empty<{ ? &(class: 0) => class-map ? &(instance: 1) => $instance-id-type-choice ? &(group: 2) => $group-id-type-choice }> flags-map = { ? &(is-configured: 0) => bool ? &(is-secure: 1) => bool ? &(is-recovery: 2) => bool ? &(is-debug: 3) => bool ? &(is-replay-protected: 4) => bool ? &(is-integrity-protected: 5) => bool ? &(is-runtime-meas: 6) => bool ? &(is-immutable: 7) => bool ? &(is-tcb: 8) => bool ? &(is-confidentiality-protected: 9) => bool * $$flags-map-extension } $group-id-type-choice /= tagged-uuid-type $group-id-type-choice /= tagged-bytes identity-triple-record = [ environment: environment-map key-list: [ + $crypto-key-type-choice ] ? conditions: non-empty<{ ? &(mkey: 0) => $measured-element-type-choice, ? &(authorized-by: 1) => [ + $crypto-key-type-choice ] }> ] $instance-id-type-choice /= tagged-ueid-type $instance-id-type-choice /= tagged-uuid-type Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 21] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 $instance-id-type-choice /= $crypto-key-type-choice $instance-id-type-choice /= tagged-bytes ip-addr-type-choice = ip4-addr-type / ip6-addr-type ip4-addr-type = bytes .size 4 ip6-addr-type = bytes .size 16 raw-int-type-choice = int / tagged-int-range int-range = [min: int / negative-inf, max: int / positive-inf] tagged-int-range = #6.564(int-range) positive-inf = null negative-inf = null linked-tag-map = { &(linked-tag-id: 0) => $tag-id-type-choice &(tag-rel: 1) => $tag-rel-type-choice } mac-addr-type-choice = eui48-addr-type / eui64-addr-type eui48-addr-type = bytes .size 6 eui64-addr-type = bytes .size 8 $measured-element-type-choice /= tagged-oid-type $measured-element-type-choice /= tagged-uuid-type $measured-element-type-choice /= uint $measured-element-type-choice /= tstr measurement-map = { ? &(mkey: 0) => $measured-element-type-choice &(mval: 1) => measurement-values-map ? &(authorized-by: 2) => [ + $crypto-key-type-choice ] } measurement-values-map = non-empty<{ ? &(version: 0) => version-map ? &(svn: 1) => svn-type-choice ? &(digests: 2) => digests-type ? &(flags: 3) => flags-map ? ( &(raw-value: 4) => $raw-value-type-choice, ? &(raw-value-mask: 5) => raw-value-mask-type ) ? &(mac-addr: 6) => mac-addr-type-choice ? &(ip-addr: 7) => ip-addr-type-choice ? &(serial-number: 8) => text ? &(ueid: 9) => ueid-type ? &(uuid: 10) => uuid-type ? &(name: 11) => text Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 22] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 ? &(cryptokeys: 13) => [ + $crypto-key-type-choice ] ? &(integrity-registers: 14) => integrity-registers ? &(raw-int: 15) => raw-int-type-choice * $$measurement-values-map-extension }> non-empty = (M) .and ({ + any => any }) oid-type = bytes tagged-oid-type = #6.111(oid-type) $raw-value-type-choice /= tagged-bytes $raw-value-type-choice /= tagged-masked-raw-value raw-value-mask-type = bytes tagged-masked-raw-value = #6.563([ value: bytes mask : bytes ]) reference-triple-record = [ ref-env: environment-map ref-claims: [ + measurement-map ] ] stateful-environment-record = [ environment: environment-map, claims-list: [ + measurement-map ] ] svn-type = uint svn = svn-type min-svn = svn-type tagged-svn = #6.552(svn) tagged-min-svn = #6.553(min-svn) svn-type-choice = svn / tagged-svn / tagged-min-svn $tag-id-type-choice /= tstr $tag-id-type-choice /= uuid-type tag-identity-map = { &(tag-id: 0) => $tag-id-type-choice ? &(tag-version: 1) => tag-version-type } $tag-rel-type-choice /= &(supplements: 0) $tag-rel-type-choice /= &(replaces: 1) Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 23] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 tag-version-type = uint .default 0 tagged-bytes = #6.560(bytes) triples-map = non-empty<{ ? &(reference-triples: 0) => [ + reference-triple-record ] ? &(endorsed-triples: 1) => [ + endorsed-triple-record ] ? &(identity-triples: 2) => [ + identity-triple-record ] ? &(attest-key-triples: 3) => [ + attest-key-triple-record ] ? &(dependency-triples: 4) => [ + domain-dependency-triple-record ] ? &(membership-triples: 5) => [ + domain-membership-triple-record ] ? &(coswid-triples: 6) => [ + coswid-triple-record ] ? &(conditional-endorsement-series-triples: 8) => [ + conditional-endorsement-series-triple-record ] ? &(conditional-endorsement-triples: 10) => [ + conditional-endorsement-triple-record ] * $$triples-map-extension }> ueid-type = bytes .size (7..33) tagged-ueid-type = #6.550(ueid-type) uuid-type = bytes .size 16 tagged-uuid-type = #6.37(uuid-type) version-map = { &(version: 0) => text ? &(version-scheme: 1) => $version-scheme } digest = [ alg: (int / text), val: bytes ] digests-type = [ + digest ] integrity-register-id-type-choice = uint / text integrity-registers = { + integrity-register-id-type-choice => digests-type Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 24] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 } concise-swid-tag = { tag-id => text / bstr .size 16, tag-version => integer, ? corpus => bool, ? patch => bool, ? supplemental => bool, software-name => text, ? software-version => text, ? version-scheme => $version-scheme, ? media => text, ? software-meta => one-or-more, entity => one-or-more, ? link => one-or-more, ? payload-or-evidence, * $$coswid-extension, global-attributes, } payload-or-evidence //= ( payload => payload-entry ) payload-or-evidence //= ( evidence => evidence-entry ) any-uri = uri label = text / int $version-scheme /= multipartnumeric $version-scheme /= multipartnumeric-suffix $version-scheme /= alphanumeric $version-scheme /= decimal $version-scheme /= semver $version-scheme /= int / text any-attribute = ( label => one-or-more / one-or-more ) one-or-more = T / [ 2* T ] global-attributes = ( ? lang => text, * any-attribute, ) hash-entry = [ hash-alg-id: int, hash-value: bytes, ] Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 25] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 entity-entry = { entity-name => text, ? reg-id => any-uri, role => one-or-more<$role>, ? thumbprint => hash-entry, * $$entity-extension, global-attributes, } $role /= tag-creator $role /= software-creator $role /= aggregator $role /= distributor $role /= licensor $role /= maintainer $role /= int / text link-entry = { ? artifact => text, href => any-uri, ? media => text, ? ownership => $ownership, rel => $rel, ? media-type => text, ? use => $use, * $$link-extension, global-attributes, } $ownership /= shared $ownership /= private $ownership /= abandon $ownership /= int / text $rel /= ancestor $rel /= component $rel /= feature $rel /= installationmedia $rel /= packageinstaller $rel /= parent $rel /= patches $rel /= requires $rel /= see-also $rel /= supersedes $rel /= supplemental $rel /= -256..64436 / text $use /= optional Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 26] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 $use /= required $use /= recommended $use /= int / text software-meta-entry = { ? activation-status => text, ? channel-type => text, ? colloquial-version => text, ? description => text, ? edition => text, ? entitlement-data-required => bool, ? entitlement-key => text, ? generator => text / bstr .size 16, ? persistent-id => text, ? product => text, ? product-family => text, ? revision => text, ? summary => text, ? unspsc-code => text, ? unspsc-version => text, * $$software-meta-extension, global-attributes, } path-elements-group = ( ? directory => one-or-more, ? file => one-or-more, ) resource-collection = ( path-elements-group, ? process => one-or-more, ? resource => one-or-more, * $$resource-collection-extension, ) file-entry = { filesystem-item, ? size => uint, ? file-version => text, ? hash => hash-entry, * $$file-extension, global-attributes, } directory-entry = { filesystem-item, ? path-elements => { path-elements-group }, * $$directory-extension, Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 27] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 global-attributes, } process-entry = { process-name => text, ? pid => integer, * $$process-extension, global-attributes, } resource-entry = { type => text, * $$resource-extension, global-attributes, } filesystem-item = ( ? key => bool, ? location => text, fs-name => text, ? root => text, ) payload-entry = { resource-collection, * $$payload-extension, global-attributes, } evidence-entry = { resource-collection, ? date => integer-time, ? device-id => text, ? location => text, * $$evidence-extension, global-attributes, } integer-time = #6.1(int) tag-id = 0 software-name = 1 entity = 2 evidence = 3 link = 4 software-meta = 5 payload = 6 hash = 7 Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 28] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 corpus = 8 patch = 9 media = 10 supplemental = 11 tag-version = 12 software-version = 13 version-scheme = 14 lang = 15 directory = 16 file = 17 process = 18 resource = 19 size = 20 file-version = 21 key = 22 location = 23 fs-name = 24 root = 25 path-elements = 26 process-name = 27 pid = 28 type = 29 entity-name = 31 reg-id = 32 role = 33 thumbprint = 34 date = 35 device-id = 36 artifact = 37 href = 38 ownership = 39 rel = 40 media-type = 41 use = 42 activation-status = 43 channel-type = 44 colloquial-version = 45 description = 46 edition = 47 entitlement-data-required = 48 entitlement-key = 49 generator = 50 persistent-id = 51 product = 52 product-family = 53 revision = 54 summary = 55 unspsc-code = 56 Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 29] Internet-Draft CoSERV April 2025 unspsc-version = 57 multipartnumeric = 1 multipartnumeric-suffix = 2 alphanumeric = 3 decimal = 4 semver = 16384 tag-creator=1 software-creator=2 aggregator=3 distributor=4 licensor=5 maintainer=6 abandon=1 private=2 shared=3 ancestor=1 component=2 feature=3 installationmedia=4 packageinstaller=5 parent=6 patches=7 requires=8 see-also=9 supersedes=10 optional=1 required=2 recommended=3 Acknowledgments TODO acknowledge. Authors' Addresses Paul Howard Arm Email: paul.howard@arm.com Thomas Fossati Linaro Email: Thomas.Fossati@linaro.org Howard & Fossati Expires 10 October 2025 [Page 30]