RFC 7236 INFORMATIONAL HTTP · SECURITY

HTTP Auth Schemes: Initial Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Authentication Scheme Registrations

The initial registrations in the HTTP authentication scheme registry.

On rfc-editor.org ↗
PUBLISHED
June 2014
AUTHORS
J. Reschke
ORG
greenbytes
STREAM
IETF
DOI
10.17487/RFC7236

RFC text

Contents
Original text · RFC Editor View on rfc-editor.org ↗
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                        J. Reschke
Request for Comments: 7236                                    greenbytes
Category: Informational                                        June 2014
ISSN: 2070-1721


               Initial Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
                  Authentication Scheme Registrations

Abstract

   This document registers Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
   authentication schemes that have been defined in RFCs before the IANA
   HTTP Authentication Scheme Registry was established.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
   approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7236.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
   2.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
   4.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.  Introduction

   This document registers Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
   authentication schemes that have been defined in RFCs before the IANA
   HTTP Authentication Scheme Registry was established.

2.  Security Considerations

   There are no security considerations related to the registration
   itself.

   Security considerations applicable to the individual authentication
   schemes ought to be discussed in the specifications that define them.

3.  IANA Considerations

   The registrations below have been added to the IANA "Hypertext
   Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Authentication Scheme Registry" at
   <http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-authschemes> (see Section 5.1
   of [RFC7235]).

   +----------------+------------+-------------------------------------+
   | Authentication | Reference  | Notes                               |
   | Scheme Name    |            |                                     |
   +----------------+------------+-------------------------------------+
   | Basic          | [RFC2617], |                                     |
   |                | Section 2  |                                     |
   | Bearer         | [RFC6750]  |                                     |
   | Digest         | [RFC2617], |                                     |
   |                | Section 3  |                                     |
   | Negotiate      | [RFC4559], | This authentication scheme violates |
   |                | Section 3  | both HTTP semantics (being          |
   |                |            | connection-oriented) and syntax     |
   |                |            | (use of syntax incompatible with    |
   |                |            | the WWW-Authenticate and            |
   |                |            | Authorization header field syntax). |
   | OAuth          | [RFC5849], |                                     |
   |                | Section    |                                     |
   |                | 3.5.1      |                                     |
   +----------------+------------+-------------------------------------+

4.  Normative References

   [RFC2617]  Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Lawrence, S.,
              Leach, P., Luotonen, A., and L. Stewart, "HTTP
              Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication",
              RFC 2617, June 1999.

   [RFC4559]  Jaganathan, K., Zhu, L., and J. Brezak, "SPNEGO-based
              Kerberos and NTLM HTTP Authentication in Microsoft
              Windows", RFC 4559, June 2006.

   [RFC5849]  Hammer-Lahav, E., "The OAuth 1.0 Protocol", RFC 5849,
              April 2010.

   [RFC6750]  Jones, M. and D. Hardt, "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization
              Framework: Bearer Token Usage", RFC 6750, October 2012.

   [RFC7235]  Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
              Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication", RFC 7235, June 2014.

Author's Address

   Julian F. Reschke
   greenbytes GmbH
   Hafenweg 16
   Muenster, NW  48155
   Germany

   EMail: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
   URI:   http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/

ISO Plain Language

On this page
PROBLEMHTTP authentication schemes had been defined in RFCs before IANA established an HTTP Authentication Scheme Registry.
MECHANISMRFC 7236 registers the existing schemes and points each entry to the RFC that defines it.
REGISTRY ENTRIESThe registry's initial entries are Basic, Bearer, Digest, Negotiate, and OAuth. The RFC says security considerations for each scheme belong in its defining specification.

§1Why the Schemes Were Registered

RFC 7236 registers HTTP authentication schemes that were defined in RFCs before the IANA HTTP Authentication Scheme Registry was established. The document is about recording those existing schemes in the registry, rather than defining their authentication behavior.

Several HTTP authentication schemes already had specifications. This RFC puts those names and specifications into one registry.

§3The Initial Registry Entries

The registry entries listed in RFC 7236 are Basic and Digest, referenced to RFC 2617; Bearer, referenced to RFC 6750; Negotiate, referenced to RFC 4559; and OAuth, referenced to RFC 5849. The registry table notes that Negotiate is connection-oriented and has syntax incompatible with the HTTP authentication header syntax.

The initial list contains Basic, Bearer, Digest, Negotiate, and OAuth. Each name points to the RFC that describes it.

§2Security Considerations

The RFC states that the act of registering the schemes has no security considerations of its own. Security considerations that apply to an individual authentication scheme should be discussed in the specification that defines that scheme.

Adding the names to a registry does not change their security. Each scheme's own document covers its security issues.