mirror of
https://github.com/samba-team/samba.git
synced 2024-12-23 17:34:34 +03:00
7055827b8f
This makes it clearer that we always want to do heimdal changes via the lorikeet-heimdal repository. Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org> Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz> Autobuild-User(master): Joseph Sutton <jsutton@samba.org> Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Jan 19 21:41:59 UTC 2022 on sn-devel-184
564 lines
18 KiB
Plaintext
564 lines
18 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Network Working Group M. Wahl
|
||
Request for Comments: 2253 Critical Angle Inc.
|
||
Obsoletes: 1779 S. Kille
|
||
Category: Standards Track Isode Ltd.
|
||
T. Howes
|
||
Netscape Communications Corp.
|
||
December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3):
|
||
UTF-8 String Representation of Distinguished Names
|
||
|
||
Status of this Memo
|
||
|
||
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
|
||
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
|
||
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
|
||
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
|
||
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
|
||
|
||
Copyright Notice
|
||
|
||
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997). All Rights Reserved.
|
||
|
||
IESG Note
|
||
|
||
This document describes a directory access protocol that provides
|
||
both read and update access. Update access requires secure
|
||
authentication, but this document does not mandate implementation of
|
||
any satisfactory authentication mechanisms.
|
||
|
||
In accordance with RFC 2026, section 4.4.1, this specification is
|
||
being approved by IESG as a Proposed Standard despite this
|
||
limitation, for the following reasons:
|
||
|
||
a. to encourage implementation and interoperability testing of
|
||
these protocols (with or without update access) before they
|
||
are deployed, and
|
||
|
||
b. to encourage deployment and use of these protocols in read-only
|
||
applications. (e.g. applications where LDAPv3 is used as
|
||
a query language for directories which are updated by some
|
||
secure mechanism other than LDAP), and
|
||
|
||
c. to avoid delaying the advancement and deployment of other Internet
|
||
standards-track protocols which require the ability to query, but
|
||
not update, LDAPv3 directory servers.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 1]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
Readers are hereby warned that until mandatory authentication
|
||
mechanisms are standardized, clients and servers written according to
|
||
this specification which make use of update functionality are
|
||
UNLIKELY TO INTEROPERATE, or MAY INTEROPERATE ONLY IF AUTHENTICATION
|
||
IS REDUCED TO AN UNACCEPTABLY WEAK LEVEL.
|
||
|
||
Implementors are hereby discouraged from deploying LDAPv3 clients or
|
||
servers which implement the update functionality, until a Proposed
|
||
Standard for mandatory authentication in LDAPv3 has been approved and
|
||
published as an RFC.
|
||
|
||
Abstract
|
||
|
||
The X.500 Directory uses distinguished names as the primary keys to
|
||
entries in the directory. Distinguished Names are encoded in ASN.1
|
||
in the X.500 Directory protocols. In the Lightweight Directory
|
||
Access Protocol, a string representation of distinguished names is
|
||
transferred. This specification defines the string format for
|
||
representing names, which is designed to give a clean representation
|
||
of commonly used distinguished names, while being able to represent
|
||
any distinguished name.
|
||
|
||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
||
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [6].
|
||
|
||
1. Background
|
||
|
||
This specification assumes familiarity with X.500 [1], and the
|
||
concept of Distinguished Name. It is important to have a common
|
||
format to be able to unambiguously represent a distinguished name.
|
||
The primary goal of this specification is ease of encoding and
|
||
decoding. A secondary goal is to have names that are human readable.
|
||
It is not expected that LDAP clients with a human user interface
|
||
would display these strings directly to the user, but would most
|
||
likely be performing translations (such as expressing attribute type
|
||
names in one of the local national languages).
|
||
|
||
2. Converting DistinguishedName from ASN.1 to a String
|
||
|
||
In X.501 [2] the ASN.1 structure of distinguished name is defined as:
|
||
|
||
DistinguishedName ::= RDNSequence
|
||
|
||
RDNSequence ::= SEQUENCE OF RelativeDistinguishedName
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 2]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
RelativeDistinguishedName ::= SET SIZE (1..MAX) OF
|
||
AttributeTypeAndValue
|
||
|
||
AttributeTypeAndValue ::= SEQUENCE {
|
||
type AttributeType,
|
||
value AttributeValue }
|
||
|
||
The following sections define the algorithm for converting from an
|
||
ASN.1 structured representation to a UTF-8 string representation.
|
||
|
||
2.1. Converting the RDNSequence
|
||
|
||
If the RDNSequence is an empty sequence, the result is the empty or
|
||
zero length string.
|
||
|
||
Otherwise, the output consists of the string encodings of each
|
||
RelativeDistinguishedName in the RDNSequence (according to 2.2),
|
||
starting with the last element of the sequence and moving backwards
|
||
toward the first.
|
||
|
||
The encodings of adjoining RelativeDistinguishedNames are separated
|
||
by a comma character (',' ASCII 44).
|
||
|
||
2.2. Converting RelativeDistinguishedName
|
||
|
||
When converting from an ASN.1 RelativeDistinguishedName to a string,
|
||
the output consists of the string encodings of each
|
||
AttributeTypeAndValue (according to 2.3), in any order.
|
||
|
||
Where there is a multi-valued RDN, the outputs from adjoining
|
||
AttributeTypeAndValues are separated by a plus ('+' ASCII 43)
|
||
character.
|
||
|
||
2.3. Converting AttributeTypeAndValue
|
||
|
||
The AttributeTypeAndValue is encoded as the string representation of
|
||
the AttributeType, followed by an equals character ('=' ASCII 61),
|
||
followed by the string representation of the AttributeValue. The
|
||
encoding of the AttributeValue is given in section 2.4.
|
||
|
||
If the AttributeType is in a published table of attribute types
|
||
associated with LDAP [4], then the type name string from that table
|
||
is used, otherwise it is encoded as the dotted-decimal encoding of
|
||
the AttributeType's OBJECT IDENTIFIER. The dotted-decimal notation is
|
||
described in [3]. As an example, strings for a few of the attribute
|
||
types frequently seen in RDNs include:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 3]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
String X.500 AttributeType
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
CN commonName
|
||
L localityName
|
||
ST stateOrProvinceName
|
||
O organizationName
|
||
OU organizationalUnitName
|
||
C countryName
|
||
STREET streetAddress
|
||
DC domainComponent
|
||
UID userid
|
||
|
||
2.4. Converting an AttributeValue from ASN.1 to a String
|
||
|
||
If the AttributeValue is of a type which does not have a string
|
||
representation defined for it, then it is simply encoded as an
|
||
octothorpe character ('#' ASCII 35) followed by the hexadecimal
|
||
representation of each of the bytes of the BER encoding of the X.500
|
||
AttributeValue. This form SHOULD be used if the AttributeType is of
|
||
the dotted-decimal form.
|
||
|
||
Otherwise, if the AttributeValue is of a type which has a string
|
||
representation, the value is converted first to a UTF-8 string
|
||
according to its syntax specification (see for example section 6 of
|
||
[4]).
|
||
|
||
If the UTF-8 string does not have any of the following characters
|
||
which need escaping, then that string can be used as the string
|
||
representation of the value.
|
||
|
||
o a space or "#" character occurring at the beginning of the
|
||
string
|
||
|
||
o a space character occurring at the end of the string
|
||
|
||
o one of the characters ",", "+", """, "\", "<", ">" or ";"
|
||
|
||
Implementations MAY escape other characters.
|
||
|
||
If a character to be escaped is one of the list shown above, then it
|
||
is prefixed by a backslash ('\' ASCII 92).
|
||
|
||
Otherwise the character to be escaped is replaced by a backslash and
|
||
two hex digits, which form a single byte in the code of the
|
||
character.
|
||
|
||
Examples of the escaping mechanism are shown in section 5.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 4]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
3. Parsing a String back to a Distinguished Name
|
||
|
||
The structure of the string is specified in a BNF grammar, based on
|
||
the grammar defined in RFC 822 [5]. Server implementations parsing a
|
||
DN string generated by an LDAPv2 client MUST also accept (and ignore)
|
||
the variants given in section 4 of this document.
|
||
|
||
distinguishedName = [name] ; may be empty string
|
||
|
||
name = name-component *("," name-component)
|
||
|
||
name-component = attributeTypeAndValue *("+" attributeTypeAndValue)
|
||
|
||
attributeTypeAndValue = attributeType "=" attributeValue
|
||
|
||
attributeType = (ALPHA 1*keychar) / oid
|
||
keychar = ALPHA / DIGIT / "-"
|
||
|
||
oid = 1*DIGIT *("." 1*DIGIT)
|
||
|
||
attributeValue = string
|
||
|
||
string = *( stringchar / pair )
|
||
/ "#" hexstring
|
||
/ QUOTATION *( quotechar / pair ) QUOTATION ; only from v2
|
||
|
||
quotechar = <any character except "\" or QUOTATION >
|
||
|
||
special = "," / "=" / "+" / "<" / ">" / "#" / ";"
|
||
|
||
pair = "\" ( special / "\" / QUOTATION / hexpair )
|
||
stringchar = <any character except one of special, "\" or QUOTATION >
|
||
|
||
hexstring = 1*hexpair
|
||
hexpair = hexchar hexchar
|
||
|
||
hexchar = DIGIT / "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F"
|
||
/ "a" / "b" / "c" / "d" / "e" / "f"
|
||
|
||
ALPHA = <any ASCII alphabetic character>
|
||
; (decimal 65-90 and 97-122)
|
||
DIGIT = <any ASCII decimal digit> ; (decimal 48-57)
|
||
QUOTATION = <the ASCII double quotation mark character '"' decimal 34>
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 5]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. Relationship with RFC 1779 and LDAPv2
|
||
|
||
The syntax given in this document is more restrictive than the syntax
|
||
in RFC 1779. Implementations parsing a string generated by an LDAPv2
|
||
client MUST accept the syntax of RFC 1779. Implementations MUST NOT,
|
||
however, generate any of the RFC 1779 encodings which are not
|
||
described above in section 2.
|
||
|
||
Implementations MUST allow a semicolon character to be used instead
|
||
of a comma to separate RDNs in a distinguished name, and MUST also
|
||
allow whitespace characters to be present on either side of the comma
|
||
or semicolon. The whitespace characters are ignored, and the
|
||
semicolon replaced with a comma.
|
||
|
||
Implementations MUST allow an oid in the attribute type to be
|
||
prefixed by one of the character strings "oid." or "OID.".
|
||
|
||
Implementations MUST allow for space (' ' ASCII 32) characters to be
|
||
present between name-component and ',', between attributeTypeAndValue
|
||
and '+', between attributeType and '=', and between '=' and
|
||
attributeValue. These space characters are ignored when parsing.
|
||
|
||
Implementations MUST allow a value to be surrounded by quote ('"'
|
||
ASCII 34) characters, which are not part of the value. Inside the
|
||
quoted value, the following characters can occur without any
|
||
escaping:
|
||
|
||
",", "=", "+", "<", ">", "#" and ";"
|
||
|
||
5. Examples
|
||
|
||
This notation is designed to be convenient for common forms of name.
|
||
This section gives a few examples of distinguished names written
|
||
using this notation. First is a name containing three relative
|
||
distinguished names (RDNs):
|
||
|
||
CN=Steve Kille,O=Isode Limited,C=GB
|
||
|
||
Here is an example name containing three RDNs, in which the first RDN
|
||
is multi-valued:
|
||
|
||
OU=Sales+CN=J. Smith,O=Widget Inc.,C=US
|
||
|
||
This example shows the method of quoting of a comma in an
|
||
organization name:
|
||
|
||
CN=L. Eagle,O=Sue\, Grabbit and Runn,C=GB
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 6]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
An example name in which a value contains a carriage return
|
||
character:
|
||
|
||
CN=Before\0DAfter,O=Test,C=GB
|
||
|
||
An example name in which an RDN was of an unrecognized type. The
|
||
value is the BER encoding of an OCTET STRING containing two bytes
|
||
0x48 and 0x69.
|
||
|
||
1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.0=#04024869,O=Test,C=GB
|
||
|
||
Finally, an example of an RDN surname value consisting of 5 letters:
|
||
|
||
Unicode Letter Description 10646 code UTF-8 Quoted
|
||
=============================== ========== ====== =======
|
||
LATIN CAPITAL LETTER L U0000004C 0x4C L
|
||
LATIN SMALL LETTER U U00000075 0x75 u
|
||
LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH CARON U0000010D 0xC48D \C4\8D
|
||
LATIN SMALL LETTER I U00000069 0x69 i
|
||
LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH ACUTE U00000107 0xC487 \C4\87
|
||
|
||
Could be written in printable ASCII (useful for debugging purposes):
|
||
|
||
SN=Lu\C4\8Di\C4\87
|
||
|
||
6. References
|
||
|
||
[1] The Directory -- overview of concepts, models and services.
|
||
ITU-T Rec. X.500(1993).
|
||
|
||
[2] The Directory -- Models. ITU-T Rec. X.501(1993).
|
||
|
||
[3] Wahl, M., Howes, T., and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory
|
||
Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.
|
||
|
||
[4] Wahl, M., Coulbeck, A., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight
|
||
Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute Syntax Definitions",
|
||
RFC 2252, December 1997.
|
||
|
||
[5] Crocker, D., "Standard of the Format of ARPA-Internet Text
|
||
Messages", STD 11, RFC 822, August 1982.
|
||
|
||
[6] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
|
||
Levels", RFC 2119.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 7]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
7. Security Considerations
|
||
|
||
7.1. Disclosure
|
||
|
||
Distinguished Names typically consist of descriptive information
|
||
about the entries they name, which can be people, organizations,
|
||
devices or other real-world objects. This frequently includes some
|
||
of the following kinds of information:
|
||
|
||
- the common name of the object (i.e. a person's full name)
|
||
- an email or TCP/IP address
|
||
- its physical location (country, locality, city, street address)
|
||
- organizational attributes (such as department name or affiliation)
|
||
|
||
Most countries have privacy laws regarding the publication of
|
||
information about people.
|
||
|
||
7.2. Use of Distinguished Names in Security Applications
|
||
|
||
The transformations of an AttributeValue value from its X.501 form to
|
||
an LDAP string representation are not always reversible back to the
|
||
same BER or DER form. An example of a situation which requires the
|
||
DER form of a distinguished name is the verification of an X.509
|
||
certificate.
|
||
|
||
For example, a distinguished name consisting of one RDN with one AVA,
|
||
in which the type is commonName and the value is of the TeletexString
|
||
choice with the letters 'Sam' would be represented in LDAP as the
|
||
string CN=Sam. Another distinguished name in which the value is
|
||
still 'Sam' but of the PrintableString choice would have the same
|
||
representation CN=Sam.
|
||
|
||
Applications which require the reconstruction of the DER form of the
|
||
value SHOULD NOT use the string representation of attribute syntaxes
|
||
when converting a distinguished name to the LDAP format. Instead,
|
||
they SHOULD use the hexadecimal form prefixed by the octothorpe ('#')
|
||
as described in the first paragraph of section 2.4.
|
||
|
||
8. Authors' Addresses
|
||
|
||
Mark Wahl
|
||
Critical Angle Inc.
|
||
4815 W. Braker Lane #502-385
|
||
Austin, TX 78759
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
EMail: M.Wahl@critical-angle.com
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 8]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
Steve Kille
|
||
Isode Ltd.
|
||
The Dome
|
||
The Square
|
||
Richmond, Surrey
|
||
TW9 1DT
|
||
England
|
||
|
||
Phone: +44-181-332-9091
|
||
EMail: S.Kille@ISODE.COM
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tim Howes
|
||
Netscape Communications Corp.
|
||
501 E. Middlefield Rd, MS MV068
|
||
Mountain View, CA 94043
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
Phone: +1 650 937-3419
|
||
EMail: howes@netscape.com
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 9]
|
||
|
||
RFC 2253 LADPv3 Distinguished Names December 1997
|
||
|
||
|
||
9. Full Copyright Statement
|
||
|
||
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997). All Rights Reserved.
|
||
|
||
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
|
||
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
|
||
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
|
||
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
|
||
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
|
||
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
|
||
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
|
||
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
|
||
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
|
||
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
|
||
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
|
||
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
|
||
English.
|
||
|
||
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
|
||
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
|
||
|
||
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
|
||
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
|
||
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
|
||
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
|
||
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
|
||
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Wahl, et. al. Proposed Standard [Page 10]
|
||
|