DOCSLIB.ORG

How to Use the Cacert Infrastructure Within an Openid Context?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How to Use the Cacert Infrastructure Within an Openid Context? Master Thesis How to use the CAcert infrastructure within an OpenID context? Auteurs: B.J. Derlagen (s0829692), O.M. Berfelo (s0756067) Educational institution: Radboud University Faculty: Faculty of Science Institute for Computing and Information Sciences Education: Information Science Thesis number: Supervisors: Prof.dr. B.P.F. Jacobs, dr.ir. E. Poll Date: 1 Preface We wrote this master thesis for our education Information Science at the Radboud University in Nijmegen. We have done a research of how we can use the CAcert infrastructure in an OpenID context. This is the result of our research. We would like to thank some people who have made a contribution to this master thesis that led us to the final result. We would like to thank our supervisors Prof.dr. B.P.F. Jacobs and dr.ir. E. Poll for their feedback, knowledge, ideas and advice. We also would like to thank Esther Makaay and Marco Davids of SIDN for the conversation we had with them. Finally we would like to thank Bernard van Gastel and Marc Overmeer for the ideas and advice they gave us. Barthold Derlagen & Onno Berfelo. Warnsveld, 3 September 2010. 2 Abstract These days more and more people have access to an internet connection. These people spend an increasing amount of time on the web. On the web you'll encounter many websites on which you'll need to authenticate yourself. In many cases you'll do this with a username and password combination. Using the same combination on every site is unwise. This is where Single Sign On (SSO) (section 2.3.1) gets into the picture. SSO is an Identity Management system (section 2.3). SSO allows users to use a single account on one site to gain access to multiple other websites. Even in the scenario of SSO there are still some pitfalls in using a username and password combination. An attacker has several options to gain access to your account. He could use a keylogger to log your credentials. He could also attempt to guess your password or use brute force. Using a certificate from a Certificate Authority (CA) based on the Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) (section 2.2) would resolve the security issues of logon credentials. OpenID is a SSO solution but it has several security problems. Most of these problems would be solved by requiring the usage of Secure Sockets Layer (SSL). The usage of a username and password as logon credentials is common in OpenID implementations and it could be a problem if an attacker were to obtain these credentials. This might be resolved by using different login credentials. CAcert is a CA that issues certificates based on a Web of Trust (WoT). CAcert failed a management audit and because of this its root certificate has not been included in any of the major browsers. This results in error and warning messages whenever someone visits a website with a certificate that has been signed by CAcert. This has halted the deployment of CAcert certificates. Using CAcert client certificates as a logon credential would give it more purpose. Perhaps it could even stimulate the growth of CAcert. OpenID (chapter 3) is an open standard, it is open source. It is a software framework which means that apart from the core code most of the code can be altered. There are therefore many different implementations of the OpenID protocol. OpenID is decentralized which means that authentication doesn't need to take place on the site that offers the service. Within OpenID there are three parties, the User, Identity Provider (IdP) and Relaying Party (RP). The IdP provides the user with an identity and an identifier. The user can provide his identifier to the RP. The RP will then redirect the user to the IdP. The user will authenticate himself to the IdP. The IdP redirects the user back to the RP. The RP then accepts that the user has identified himself. OpenID has some security and trust problems (section 3.2). CAcert (chapter 5) is not unlike a common CA (section 2.2). It does, however, use a WoT to verify the identy of their users. CAcert has assurers which are users with 100 or more assurance points who have successfully taken an assurer test. Assurers can grant users from ten up to thirty-five points depending on their rank. Their rank is determined by the amount of people they have assured or being active during the start-up process of CAcert. A user needs to print a verification form. He then needs to provide this form and show his identification papers to an assurer. The assurer can then grant the user points. Once a user has 50 or more points he is deemed assured which will unlock various options in generating certificates. User can then obtain class 3 certificates and include his name in his certificates. During the creation of this thesis an idea arose to develop a proof of concept (chapter 6). This proof of concept was to use a CAcert client certificate as a logon credential on an IdP. The 3 proof of concept is based on a package named SimpleID. This package was selected after comparing it with several other packages. Some of the scripts of the SimpleID were altered to enable user login with a CAcert client certificate. The credentials of users are stored in a database. 4 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Problem statement ....................................................................................................... 8 1.1.1 Research questions ............................................................................................... 9 1.2 Method ......................................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Thesis structure .......................................................................................................... 10 2 Theoretical framework ...................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Security Goals ............................................................................................................ 11 2.1.1 Confidentiality .................................................................................................... 11 2.1.2 Integrity .............................................................................................................. 11 2.1.3 Availability ......................................................................................................... 12 2.1.4 Authentication .................................................................................................... 12 2.1.5 Accountability .................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) ................................................................................ 13 2.2.1 X.509 (Public-key certificate) ............................................................................ 15 2.3 Identity Management ................................................................................................. 16 2.3.1 Single Sign On (SSO) ........................................................................................ 16 3 OpenID .............................................................................................................................. 17 3.1 Protocol ...................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.1 Enter OpenID identifier ...................................................................................... 20 3.1.2 Discovery ........................................................................................................... 22 3.1.3 Association request ............................................................................................ 23 3.1.4 Association response .......................................................................................... 24 3.1.5 Authentication request ........................................................................................ 25 3.1.6 Request authentication and authorization .......................................................... 25 3.1.7 Authenticate and authorize ................................................................................. 26 3.1.8 Positive assertion ................................................................................................ 27 3.1.9 Verification ......................................................................................................... 28 3.2 Problems .................................................................................................................... 29 3.2.1 Trust problems .................................................................................................... 31 3.3 Alternative OpenID solutions .................................................................................... 31 3.3.1 OpenID Plus ....................................................................................................... 31 3.3.2 Personal Identity Portal ...................................................................................... 32 3.3.3 MyOpenID ......................................................................................................... 32 3.4 Protocol in other research .......................................................................................... 32 4 Single Sign On comparison .............................................................................................. 34 5 4.1 Kerberos
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Supporting Secure Services on Dynamic Aggregation of Heterogeneous Networks
    Supporting Secure Services on Dynamic Aggregation of Heterogeneous Networks SUBMITTED TO UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY David Tai Wai Lai July 2010 Certification of Dissertation I certify that the ideas, experimental work, results, analysis, software, and conclusions reported in this dissertation are entirely my own effort, except where otherwise acknowl- edged. I also certify that the work is original and has not been previously submitted for any other award or degree. Signature of Candidate Date Endorsement Signature of Supervisor Date ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opin- ion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dr. Zhongwei Zhang (University of Southern Queensland) I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opin- ion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dr. Shan Suthaharan (University of Northern Carolina at Greensboro) iii iv Abstract Sharing of services over IP networks prove to be an effective approach to satisfy the demand of network users when their home network cannot offer the required services. Authenti- cation, authorization and revocation are some of the important challenges in the service sharing services over IP networks. This research address the problem associated with the authentication because it becomes more and more complicated due to the incompatible au- thentication schemes used by individual autonomous networks, privacy of authentication information, and the overhead in establishing the sharing.
    [Show full text]
  • SHOW TEASE: It's Time for Security Now!. Steve Gibson Is Here. We're Going to Talk About the Strange Case of the Estonian ID Cards
    Security Now! Transcript of Episode #642 Page 1 of 30 Transcript of Episode #642 BGP Description: This week we examine how Estonia handled the Infineon crypto bug; two additional consequences of the pressure to maliciously mine cryptocurrency; zero-day exploits in the popular vBulletin forum system; Mozilla in the doghouse over "Mr. Robot"; Win10's insecure password manager mistake; when legacy protocol come back to bite us; how to bulk-steal any Chrome user's entire stored password vault; and we finally know where and why the uber-potent Mirai botnet was created, and by whom. We also have a bit of errata and some fun miscellany. Then we're going to take a look at BGP, another creaky yet crucial - and vulnerable - protocol that glues the global Internet together. High quality (64 kbps) mp3 audio file URL: http://media.GRC.com/sn/SN-642.mp3 Quarter size (16 kbps) mp3 audio file URL: http://media.GRC.com/sn/sn-642-lq.mp3 SHOW TEASE: It's time for Security Now!. Steve Gibson is here. We're going to talk about the strange case of the Estonian ID cards. A weird bug or actually flaw introduced into Microsoft's Windows 10. We're still not sure exactly who got it and why. We'll also talk about the case of the Firefox plugin promoting "Mr. Robot," and a whole lot more, all coming up next on Security Now!. Leo Laporte: This is Security Now! with Steve Gibson, Episode 642, recorded Tuesday, December 19th, 2017: BGP. It's time for Security Now!, the show where we cover your security online with this guy right here, the Explainer in Chief, Steve Gibson.
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary.Pdf
    Glossary Note: Terms in italics are described in their own glossary entries. 3DES. See Data Encryption Standard. A A RR. Type identifier for a DNS Address resource record. Active Directory (AD). The directory service for Windows 2000. A hierarchical, object-oriented database that stores distributed data for Windows 2000 domains, trees, and forests. Active Directory-integrated zones. DNS zones for which zone data are stored in Active Directory. All copies of an Active Directory-integrated zone are peers and can accept changes to the zone. Zone data are replicated through Active Directory. Zone transfers are required only when importing data from a primary zone or exporting data to a secondary zone. AD. Abbreviation for Active Directory. address class. See IP address class. address resolution protocol (ARP). A protocol used by IP to discover the hardware address of the device to which a datagram is being sent. Address resource record. A DNS resource record that maps a FQDN to an IP address. Referred to as Host resource records when administering Windows 2000 DNS. Referred to as Host Address resource records in this book. AH. See authentication header. ARP. See address resolution protocol. asymmetric cryptography. A cryptography method that uses one key for encryption and another key for decryption. Also called public key cryptography. attribute. A characteristic of an object in an object- oriented database such as Active Directory; often called a property in Windows 2000. authentication. The ability of one entity to reliably determine the identity of another entity. authentication header (AH). A security protocol used by IPSec that provides authentication and message integrity.
    [Show full text]
  • Pluggable Authentication Modules
    Who this book is written for This book is for experienced system administrators and developers working with multiple Linux/UNIX servers or with both UNIX and Pluggable Authentication Windows servers. It assumes a good level of admin knowledge, and that developers are competent in C development on UNIX-based systems. Pluggable Authentication Modules PAM (Pluggable Authentication Modules) is a modular and flexible authentication management layer that sits between Linux applications and the native underlying authentication system. The PAM framework is widely used by most Linux distributions for authentication purposes. Modules Originating from Solaris 2.6 ten years ago, PAM is used today by most proprietary and free UNIX operating systems including GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris, following both the design concept and the practical details. PAM is thus a unifying technology for authentication mechanisms in UNIX. This book provides a practical approach to UNIX/Linux authentication. The design principles are thoroughly explained, then illustrated through the examination of popular modules. It is intended as a one-stop introduction and reference to PAM. What you will learn from this book From Technologies to Solutions • Install, compile, and configure Linux-PAM on your system • Download and compile third-party modules • Understand the PAM framework and how it works • Learn to work with PAM’s management groups and control fl ags • Test and debug your PAM confi guration Pluggable Authentication Modules • Install and configure the pamtester utility
    [Show full text]
  • Silkperformer® 2010 R2 Release Notes Borland Software Corporation 4 Hutton Centre Dr., Suite 900 Santa Ana, CA 92707
    SilkPerformer® 2010 R2 Release Notes Borland Software Corporation 4 Hutton Centre Dr., Suite 900 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Copyright 2009-2010 Micro Focus (IP) Limited. All Rights Reserved. SilkPerformer contains derivative works of Borland Software Corporation, Copyright 1992-2010 Borland Software Corporation (a Micro Focus company). MICRO FOCUS and the Micro Focus logo, among others, are trademarks or registered trademarks of Micro Focus (IP) Limited or its subsidiaries or affiliated companies in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. BORLAND, the Borland logo and SilkPerformer are trademarks or registered trademarks of Borland Software Corporation or its subsidiaries or affiliated companies in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. All other marks are the property of their respective owners. ii Contents SilkPerformer Release Notes ..............................................................................4 What's New in SilkPerformer 2010 R2 ...............................................................5 Browser-Driven Load Testing Enhancements .......................................................................5 Enhanced Support for Large-Scale Load Testing .................................................................6 Support for Testing BlazeDS Server Applications .................................................................7 Support for Custom Terminal Emulation Screen Sizes .........................................................7 Graceful Disconnect for Citrix Sessions ................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Kerberos: an Authentication Service for Computer Networks by Clifford Neuman and Theodore Ts’O
    Kerberos: An Authentication Service for Computer Networks by Clifford Neuman and Theodore Ts’o Presented by: Smitha Sundareswaran Chi Tsong Su Introduction z Kerberos: An authentication protocol based on cryptography z Designed at MIT under project Athena z Variation of Needham Schroeder protocol - Difference: Kerberos assumes all systems on the network to be synchronized z Similar function as its mythological namesake: “guards” the access to network protocols Contribution z Defines ideas of authentication, Integrity, confidentiality and Authorization z Working of Kerberos z Limitations z Utilities z How to obtain and use Kerberos z Other methods to improve security Why Kerberos? z Foils threats due to eavesdropping z More convenient than password based authentication { Allows user to avoid “authentication by assertion” z Authentication based on cryptography: attacker can’t impersonate a valid user How Kerberos Works z Distributed authentication service using a series of encrypted messages {Password doesn’t pass through the network z Timestamps to reduce the number of messages needed for authentication z “Ticket granting Service” for subsequent authentication Kerberos Authentication and Encryption zAuthentication proves that a client is running on behalf of a particular user zUses encryption key for authentication {Encryption key = Password zEncryption implemented using DES {Checksum included in message checksum and encryption provide integrity & confidentiality The Kerberos Ticket z Initially, client and Server don’t share an encryption
    [Show full text]
  • Feature Description
    NTLM Feature Description UPDATED: 19 March 2021 NTLM Copyright Notices Copyright © 2002-2021 Kemp Technologies, Inc. All rights reserved. Kemp Technologies and the Kemp Technologies logo are registered trademarks of Kemp Technologies, Inc. Kemp Technologies, Inc. reserves all ownership rights for the LoadMaster and Kemp 360 product line including software and documentation. Used, under license, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,473,802, 6,374,300, 8,392,563, 8,103,770, 7,831,712, 7,606,912, 7,346,695, 7,287,084 and 6,970,933 kemp.ax 2 Copyright 2002-2021, Kemp Technologies, All Rights Reserved NTLM Table of Contents 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Document Purpose 6 1.2 Intended Audience 6 1.3 Related Firmware Version 6 2 Configure NTLM Authentication 7 2.1 Configure Internet Options on the Client Machine 7 2.2 Configure the LoadMaster 11 2.2.1 Enable NTLM Proxy Mode 13 2.2.2 Configure the Server Side SSO Domain 13 2.2.3 Configure the Client Side SSO Domain 15 2.2.4 Configure the Virtual Service 15 2.3 Configure Firefox to Allow NTLM (if needed) 17 2.4 Troubleshooting 18 References 19 Last Updated Date 20 kemp.ax 3 Copyright 2002-2021, Kemp Technologies, All Rights Reserved NTLM 1 Introduction 1 Introduction NT LAN Manager (NTLM) is a Windows Challenge/Response authentication protocol that is often used on networks that include systems running the Windows operating system and Active Directory. Kerberos authentication adds greater security than NTLM systems on a network and provides Windows-based systems with an integrated single sign-on (SSO) mechanism.
    [Show full text]
  • Etsi Tr 133 995 V13.0.1 (2017-04)
    ETSI TR 133 995 V13.0.1 (2017-04) TECHNICAL REPORT Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Study on security aspects of integration of Single Sign-On (SSO) frameworks with 3GPP operator-controlled resources and mechanisms (3GPP TR 33.995 version 13.0.1 Release 13) 3GPP TR 33.995 version 13.0.1 Release 13 1 ETSI TR 133 995 V13.0.1 (2017-04) Reference RTR/TSGS-0333995vd01 Keywords LTE,SECURITY,UMTS ETSI 650 Route des Lucioles F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16 Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88 Important notice The present document can be downloaded from: http://www.etsi.org/standards-search The present document may be made available in electronic versions and/or in print. The content of any electronic and/or print versions of the present document shall not be modified without the prior written authorization of ETSI. In case of any existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions and/or in print, the only prevailing document is the print of the Portable Document Format (PDF) version kept on a specific network drive within ETSI Secretariat. Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status. Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at https://portal.etsi.org/TB/ETSIDeliverableStatus.aspx If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services: https://portal.etsi.org/People/CommiteeSupportStaff.aspx Copyright Notification No part may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm except as authorized by written permission of ETSI.
    [Show full text]
  • State of North Carolina Request for Proposal No
    STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. 41-100358-001 Department of Information Technology Offers will be publicly opened: April 29, 2020 at 2:00pm EST Issue Date: March 2, 2020 Refer ALL inquiries regarding this RFP to: Commodity Number: 920 Leroy Kodak] Description: Identity Access Management System [email protected]] Using Agency: Department of Information [919-754-6665] Technology Requisition No.: None OFFER The State solicits offers for Services and/or goods described in this solicitation. All offers and responses received shall be treated as Offers to contract. EXECUTION In compliance with this Request for Proposal, and subject to all the conditions herein, the undersigned offers and agrees to furnish any or all Services or goods upon which prices are offered, at the price(s) offered herein, within the time specified herein. By executing this offer, I certify that this offer is submitted competitively and without collusion. Failure to execute/sign offer prior to submittal shall render offer invalid. Late offers are not acceptable. OFFEROR: STREET ADDRESS: P.O. BOX: ZIP: CITY, STATE & ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: TOLL FREE TEL. NO PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING: FAX NUMBER: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: DATE: E-MAIL: Offer valid for one hundred twenty (120) days from date of offer opening unless otherwise stated here: ____ days ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER If any or all parts of this offer are accepted, an authorized representative of the Department of Information Technology shall affix their signature hereto and any subsequent Request for Best and Final Offer, if issued. Acceptance shall create a contract having an order of precedence as follows: Best and Final Offers, if any, Special terms and conditions specific to this RFP, Specifications of the RFP, the Department of Information Technology Terms and Conditions, and the agreed portion of the awarded Vendor’s Offer.
    [Show full text]
  • OK: Oauth 2.0 Interface for the Kerberos V5 Authentication Protocol
    OK: OAuth 2.0 interface for the Kerberos V5 Authentication Protocol James Max Kanter Bennett Cyphers Bruno Faviero John Peebles [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 1. Problem Kerberos is a powerful, convenient framework for user authentication and authorization. Within MIT, Kerberos is used with many online institute services to verify users as part of Project Athena. However, it can be difficult for developers unfamiliar with Kerberos development to take advantage of its resources for use in third-party apps. OAuth 2.0 is an open source protocol used across the web for secure delegated access to resources on a server. Designed to be developer-friendly, OAuth is the de facto standard for authenticating users across sites, and is used by services including Google, Facebook, and Twitter. Our goal with OK Server is to provide an easy way for developers to access third-party services using Kerberos via OAuth. The benefits of this are twofold: developers can rely on an external service for user identification and verification, and users only have to trust a single centralized server with their credentials. Additionally, developers can request access to a subset of Kerberos services on behalf of a user. 2. Implementation overview Our system is composed of two main components: a server (the Kerberos client) to retrieve and process tickets from the MIT KDC, and an OAuth interface (the OAuth server) to interact with a client app (the app) wishing to make use of Kerberos authentication. When using our system, a client application uses the OAuth protocol to get Kerberos service tickets for a particular user.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 15-70-411FINAL[1]
    Lesson 15: Configuring Service Authentication MOAC 70-411: Administering Windows Server 2012 Overview • Exam Objective 5.1: Configure Service Authentication • Configuring Service Authentication • Managing Service Accounts © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2 Configuring Service Authentication Lesson 15: Configuring Service Authentication © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 3 Authentication • Authentication is the act of confirming the identity of a user or system and is an essential part used in authorization when the user or system tries to access a server or network resource. • Two types of authentication that Windows supports are NT LAN Manager (NTLM) and Kerberos. • Kerberos is the default authentication protocol for domain computers. • NTLM is the default authentication protocol for Windows NT, standalone computers that are not part of a domain, and situations in which you authenticate to a server using an IP address. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 4 Understanding NTLM Authentication • NT LAN Manager (NTLM) is a suite of Microsoft security protocols that provides authentication, integrity, and confidentiality to users. • NTLM is an integrated single sign-on mechanism. • NTLM uses a challenge-response mechanism for authentication in which clients are able to prove their identities without sending a password to the server. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 5 Managing Kerberos Kerberos: • Is a computer network authentication protocol, which allows hosts to prove their identity over a non-secure network in a secure manner. • Can provide mutual authentication
    [Show full text]
  • BIG-IP Access Policy Manager
    DATA SHEET BIG-IP Access Policy Manager WHAT'S INSIDE Simple, Secure, and Seamless Access to 2 Bridging Secure Any Application, Anywhere Application Access Applications are gateways to your critical and sensitive data. Simple, secure access to 17 BIG-IP APM Features your applications is paramount, but application access today is extremely complex. Apps 19 F5 BIG-IP Platforms can be hosted anywhere—in the public cloud, in a private cloud, on-premises, or in a data center. Ensuring users have secure, authenticated access anytime, anywhere, to only the 19 F5 Support Services applications they are authorized to access is now a significant challenge. There are different application access methods to deal with these complexities. There are also various sources for authorized user identity, as well as dealing with applications that require modern or more traditional authentication and authorization methods, single sign-on (SSO), federation, and more, in addition to ensuring a secure, simple user access experience to support and consider. With digital transformation touching every part of an enterprise today, native cloud and Software as a Service (SaaS) applications are now the enterprise application standard. Many organizations, though, find they’re unable or unwilling to migrate all their applications to the cloud. There may be mission-critical classic or custom applications that cannot or should not support migration to the public cloud or be easily replaced by a SaaS solution. Applications are being hosted in a variety of locations, with differing and many times disparate authentication and authorization methods that are unable to communicate with each other or work seamlessly across existing SSO or federated identity.
    [Show full text]