1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
|
<pre>Independent Submission A. Melnikov
Request for Comments: 7912 Isode Ltd
Category: Informational June 2016
ISSN: 2070-1721
<span class="h1">Message Authorizing Email Header Field and Its Use for the</span>
<span class="h1">Draft and Release Procedure</span>
Abstract
This document describes a procedure for when a Military Message
Handling System (MMHS) message is composed by one user and is only
released to the mail transfer system when one or more Authorizing
Users authorize release of the message by adding the
MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field. The resulting message can be
optionally signed by the sender and/or reviewer, allowing recipients
to verify both the original signature (if any) and the review
signatures.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.
This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other
RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
its discretion and makes no statement about its value for
implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by
the RFC Editor are not a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see <a href="./rfc7841#section-2">Section 2 of RFC 7841</a>.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7912">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7912</a>.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(<a href="http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a>) 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.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
Table of Contents
<a href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-2">2</a>
<a href="#section-2">2</a>. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3">3</a>. Draft and Release Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3.1">3.1</a>. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3.2">3.2</a>. Handling of Initial Message Submission by the MSA . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3.3">3.3</a>. Review by Authorizing User(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-4">4</a>
<a href="#section-3.3.1">3.3.1</a>. Processing of Encrypted Messages . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-5">5</a>
<a href="#section-3.3.2">3.3.2</a>. Authorizing S/MIME Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-5">5</a>
<a href="#section-3.4">3.4</a>. Role of Other Messaging Agents at the Sender's Domain . . <a href="#page-6">6</a>
<a href="#section-3.4.1">3.4.1</a>. MDA at the Sender's Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-6">6</a>
<a href="#section-3.4.2">3.4.2</a>. Border MTA at the Sender's Domain . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-6">6</a>
<a href="#section-4">4</a>. MMHS-Authorizing-Users Header Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-6">6</a>
<a href="#section-5">5</a>. Updated MIXER Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-5.1">5.1</a>. Mapping from <a href="./rfc5322">RFC 5322</a>/MIME to X.400 . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-5.2">5.2</a>. Mapping from X.400 to <a href="./rfc5322">RFC 5322</a>/MIME . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-6">6</a>. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-7">7</a>. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-7.1">7.1</a>. Forged Header Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#section-7.2">7.2</a>. Intentionally Malformed Header Fields . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#section-8">8</a>. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#section-8.1">8.1</a>. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#section-8.2">8.2</a>. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-10">10</a>
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-11">11</a>
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-11">11</a>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction</span>
In some secure environments, email messages can't be released to the
Message Transfer System (MTS); thus, they can't be delivered to
recipients unless they are authorized by one or more Authorizing
Users (e.g., Releasing Officers or Release Authorities). This
document describes how this mechanism can be realized by an
additional Internet Email [<a href="./rfc5322" title=""Internet Message Format"">RFC5322</a>] header field and optionally
protected using S/MIME [<a href="./rfc5750" title=""Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Certificate Handling"">RFC5750</a>] [<a href="./rfc5751" title=""Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Message Specification"">RFC5751</a>] or DomainKeys Identified
Mail (DKIM) [<a href="./rfc6376" title=""DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures"">RFC6376</a>].
This document describes a procedure for how an email message composed
by one user can be released to the MTS when one or more Authorizing
Users authorize and optionally countersign the message. The MMHS-
Authorizing-Users header field (see <a href="#section-4">Section 4</a>) communicates which
user(s) authorized the message. If S/MIME signed, the resulting
message allows recipients to verify both the original (if any) and
counter signatures. The original S/MIME signature generated by the
sender (if any) is unaffected by additional S/MIME review signatures.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Conventions Used in This Document</span>
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 [<a href="./rfc2119" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">RFC2119</a>].
The formal syntax uses the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF)
[<a href="./rfc5234" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">RFC5234</a>] notation, including the core rules defined in <a href="./rfc5234#appendix-B">Appendix B of
RFC 5234</a> [<a href="./rfc5234" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">RFC5234</a>]. Terms not defined in this document are taken
from [<a href="./rfc5322" title=""Internet Message Format"">RFC5322</a>].
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. Draft and Release Procedure</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.1" href="#section-3.1">3.1</a>. Terminology</span>
Drafter: Any email user that composes a message (Draft Message)
needing authorization before it is released to its intended
recipients.
Authorizing User (also Releaser or Authorizer): The mailbox of a user
or a group of users that must inspect and authorize the release of a
Draft Message before it can be sent. An organization may require
more than one Authorizing User to authorize the release of a Draft
Message.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.2" href="#section-3.2">3.2</a>. Handling of Initial Message Submission by the MSA</span>
The original email message to be sent doesn't include the MMHS-
Authorizing-Users header field. It may or may not include the
sender's S/MIME signature.
The message to be sent is first submitted over SMTP [<a href="./rfc6409" title=""Message Submission for Mail"">RFC6409</a>]. The
specific mechanism for how it arrives to the Authorizing User(s) is
not specified in this document. One possibility is for the Message
Submission Agent (MSA) to redirect all email messages not addressed
to Authorizing Users and not submitted by Authorizing Users to a
preconfigured mailbox(es) that can be accessed by Authorizing
User(s). Another possibility is for the MSA to redirect all email
messages without the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field and/or
corresponding S/MIME review signatures to a preconfigured mailbox(es)
that can be accessed by Authorizing User(s).
In order to prevent a malicious sender from bypassing or altering the
Draft and Release procedure, the MSA MUST check that the MMHS-
Authorizing-Users header field (if present) is syntactically valid,
contains the email addresses of entities authorized to act as
Authorizing Users, and, when review signatures are used, that every
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
entity listed has one or more matching review signature (or
signature) that is valid.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.3" href="#section-3.3">3.3</a>. Review by Authorizing User(s)</span>
Each user agent (UA) that is used by an authorized user MUST perform
the following steps (if there are multiple Authorizing Users, the
whole sequence of steps below is repeated for each Authorizing User):
1. Verify the origination of the message (From/Sender header
fields). The exact mechanism to do that is out of scope for this
document, but one example is by verifying the S/MIME signature,
making sure that the signature protects all header fields (i.e.,
wrapped by message/rfc822, as described in <a href="./rfc5751#section-3.1">Section 3.1 of
[RFC5751]</a>) and that it matches the sender of the message, as
described in [<a href="./rfc5750" title=""Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Certificate Handling"">RFC5750</a>]. Another example is by verifying a DKIM
signature [<a href="./rfc6376" title=""DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures"">RFC6376</a>] (added by the Drafter's Mail User Agent (MUA)
or MSA) that covers the From/Sender header fields.
2. Check if the message already contains the MMHS-Authorizing-Users
header field with the email address of the Authorizing User.
(This can happen, for example, if the email system is
misconfigured and thus contains a loop, or if a malicious sender
or attacker is trying to affect the authorization procedure.) If
the message doesn't contain the email address of the Authorizing
User in the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field, then go to the
next step. If the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field contains
the email address of the Authorizing User, verify the validity of
the header field (for example, by checking for the S/MIME
signature/review signature or for the DKIM signature) and also
verify that the email address associated with the signature
matches the email address of the Authorizing User. If the
validity of the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field can be
verified, go to step 5 below. Otherwise, return the message to
the sender (bounce) or redirect the message to a designated abuse
mailbox.
3. Allow the Authorizing User to review the content of the message.
Some of the checks can be automated (for example, search for
keywords). (See <a href="#section-3.3.1">Section 3.3.1</a> for additional considerations.)
If, based on the check, the Authorizing User is happy to release
the message to the MTS (or to the next Authorizing User, if
multiple authorizations are required), the UA SHOULD enable the
Authorizing User to protect additions to the MMHS-Authorizing-
Users header field, for example, by allowing the addition of the
S/MIME review signature (if S/MIME is used for protecting the
MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field. See <a href="#section-3.3.2">Section 3.3.2</a> for more
details). If the Authorizing User wants to reject the message,
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
it SHOULD be returned to the Drafter with an explanatory note or
it MAY be discarded. The Authorizing User can also choose to
forward the message to another Authorizing User for additional
approval or become a new Drafter of the message. If the
Authorizing User becomes the new Drafter, its UA MUST strip any
existing email addresses from the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header
field.
4. If there is an existing MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field
containing the email address of the Authorizing User, skip this
step. Otherwise, insert a new MMHS-Authorizing-Users header
field (if absent) containing the email address of the Authorizing
User or append the email address of the Authorizing User to the
end of the existing MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field.
5. The (possibly) updated email message is either released to the
MTS or to the next Authorizing User, as per email system
configuration. Note that if the Authorizing User updates the
message in a manner that invalidates existing S/MIME or DKIM
signature(s), the Authorizing User becomes the Drafter and needs
to reapply any protections.
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.3.1" href="#section-3.3.1">3.3.1</a>. Processing of Encrypted Messages</span>
Any encrypted message sent in an environment where the Draft and
Release procedure is in force also needs to be encrypted to all
Authorizing Users, so that they can perform review of the message.
If a User Agent used by an Authorizing User can't decrypt the
message, it SHOULD notify the sender (which can be the Drafter or a
previous Authorizing User) about the problem using a non-delivery
Delivery Status Notification (DSN) or through some other means. The
ciphertext that cannot be decrypted by the Authorizing User MAY be
included in the notification to aid debugging. A possible reason not
to notify the sender is to avoid Denial-of-Service attacks, for
example, if an attacker discovers a way to inject fake messages with
encryption that doesn't validate in order to overflow the sender's
INBOX.
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.3.2" href="#section-3.3.2">3.3.2</a>. Authorizing S/MIME Signatures</span>
If S/MIME were not used, the Authorizing User can become the original
signer of the message.
If a message is signed with multiple signatures (for example, using
different cryptographic algorithms, as described in [<a href="./rfc5752" title=""Multiple Signatures in Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)"">RFC5752</a>]), all
of the signatures that can be verified by an Authorizing User SHOULD
be signed with a review signature (authorizing signatures). A
recipient of the message can consider any chain of review signatures
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
that matches MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field values as valid,
only if all signatures in the chain are verified. All of the
signatures that cannot be verified MUST be stripped by the
Authorizing User Agent.
When triple wrapping [<a href="./rfc2634" title=""Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME"">RFC2634</a>] is used, authorizing signatures are
applied to the outer level, so that it can be verified by Message
Transfer Agents (MTAs) without the need to decrypt content.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.4" href="#section-3.4">3.4</a>. Role of Other Messaging Agents at the Sender's Domain</span>
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.4.1" href="#section-3.4.1">3.4.1</a>. MDA at the Sender's Domain</span>
If a message being sent is to be delivered within the sender's
domain, Message Delivery Agents (MDAs) are responsible for ensuring
that the message was properly authorized by Authorizing User(s), as
determined by the sender's domain email system configuration. They
verify the presence and validity of the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header
field in the message, as well as the validity of associated
signatures on the message.
Note that the above requirements don't apply to direct delivery to
any user designated as an Authorizing User.
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.4.2" href="#section-3.4.2">3.4.2</a>. Border MTA at the Sender's Domain</span>
The sender's domain border MTAs are responsible for ensuring that all
messages that leave the sender's domain were properly authorized by
the Authorizing User(s), as determined by the sender's domain email
system configuration. They verify the presence and validity of the
MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field in outgoing messages, as well as
the validity of associated signatures on the message.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. MMHS-Authorizing-Users Header Field</span>
The MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field specifies the list of
Authorizing Users (or entities(*)) that countersigned this email
message (for example, using S/MIME) before it was authorized for
release to the MTS. Each user/entity is described by the email
address.
(*) Note that in some environments, identities of Authorizing Users
are required to be hidden from recipients of email messages; so, upon
receipt, MMHS-Authorizing-Users might contain an email address
associated with a group of possible users. Such email addresses need
to have signatures that don't disclose group membership.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
The MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field specified in this document
MUST NOT appear more than once in message headers. An email message
that contains multiple MMHS-Authorizing-Users is malformed. An agent
processing such a malformed message SHOULD either return it to the
sender (if possible) or fix the message so that it contains only one
copy of the header field.
MMHS-Authorizing-Users = "MMHS-Authorizing-Users:"
mailbox-list CRLF
mailbox-list = <Defined in <a href="./rfc5322">RFC 5322</a>>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. Updated MIXER Mapping</span>
This section provides an updated version of the MIXER mapping
specified in [<a href="./rfc2156" title=""MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay): Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822/MIME"">RFC2156</a>] for MMHS applications.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.1" href="#section-5.1">5.1</a>. Mapping from <a href="./rfc5322">RFC 5322</a>/MIME to X.400</span>
In the absence of the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field, the From
and Sender header fields are mapped to their X.400 equivalents as
specified in [<a href="./rfc2156" title=""MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay): Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822/MIME"">RFC2156</a>].
If the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field is present:
1. If the Sender header field is present, it is mapped to
IPMS.Heading.originator; otherwise, the first From header field
address is mapped to IPMS.Heading.originator.
2. Map the From header field address(es) and the MMHS-Authorizing-
Users header field address(es) to IPMS.Heading.authorizing-users,
skipping the first From header field address if it was mapped to
IPMS.Heading.originator.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2" href="#section-5.2">5.2</a>. Mapping from X.400 to <a href="./rfc5322">RFC 5322</a>/MIME</span>
Mapping from X.400 to the Internet is controlled by whether or not a
particular message is considered a military message. A message is
considered a military message (as defined by ACP 123 [<a href="#ref-ACP123" title=""Common Messaging strategy and procedures"">ACP123</a>] and
also specified in STANAG 4406 [<a href="#ref-STANAG-4406">STANAG-4406</a>]) if there are any MMHS
heading extensions present. Alternatively, this MAY be done by
configuration (i.e., all messages can be considered military
messages).
For non-military messages, mapping from X.400 as specified in
[<a href="./rfc2156" title=""MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay): Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822/MIME"">RFC2156</a>] is used.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
For military messages, the following mapping is used:
1. IPMS.Heading.originator is mapped to the From header field.
2. The IPMS.Heading.authorizing-users is mapped to the MMHS-
Authorizing-Users header field.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>. IANA Considerations</span>
IANA has added the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field specified in
<a href="#section-4">Section 4</a> to the "Provisional Message Header Field Names" registry,
defined by "Registration Procedures for Message Header Fields"
[<a href="./rfc3864" title=""Registration Procedures for Message Header Fields"">RFC3864</a>]. The registration template is as follows:
Header field name: MMHS-Authorizing-Users
Applicable protocol: mail ([<a href="./rfc5322" title=""Internet Message Format"">RFC5322</a>])
Status: provisional
Author/Change controller: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Specification document(s): <a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a>
Related information:
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-7" href="#section-7">7</a>. Security Considerations</span>
In some military environments, the identities of Authorizing Users
are required to be hidden from recipients of email messages. This
can be accomplished by using a group address for the MMHS-
Authorizing-Users. In this way, the recipient will know that it was
released by an Authorizing User in that group, but the recipient will
not know which one of them took the action.
For those organizations that do not wish to disclose the Authorizing
Users' group membership, care must also be taken to ensure that the
information included in the certificate used for signing email
messages does not disclose individuals in the group.
Further security considerations are described in subsections of this
section.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.1" href="#section-7.1">7.1</a>. Forged Header Fields</span>
A malicious sender may add/change an MMHS-Authorizing-Users header
field to bypass or alter the message authorization procedure invoked
for messages with no MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field. For this
reason, it is important for agents and clients that rely on the
validity of the MMHS-Authorizing-Users header field to also verify
the review signature (or a similar protection mechanism) that
confirms that a particular person or entity authorized release of a
message.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-7.2" href="#section-7.2">7.2</a>. Intentionally Malformed Header Fields</span>
It is possible for an attacker to add an MMHS-Authorizing-Users
header field that is extraordinarily large or otherwise malformed in
an attempt to discover or exploit weaknesses in the header field
parsing code. Implementations MUST thoroughly verify all such header
fields received from MTAs and be robust against intentionally as well
as unintentionally malformed header fields.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-8" href="#section-8">8</a>. References</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-8.1" href="#section-8.1">8.1</a>. Normative References</span>
[<a id="ref-ACP123">ACP123</a>] CCEB, "Common Messaging strategy and procedures", ACP 123
(B), May 2009.
[<a id="ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC2156">RFC2156</a>] Kille, S., "MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay):
Mapping between X.400 and <a href="./rfc822">RFC 822</a>/MIME", <a href="./rfc2156">RFC 2156</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2156, January 1998,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2156">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2156</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC2634">RFC2634</a>] Hoffman, P., Ed., "Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME",
<a href="./rfc2634">RFC 2634</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC2634, June 1999,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2634">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2634</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC5234">RFC5234</a>] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, <a href="./rfc5234">RFC 5234</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234</a>>.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
[<a id="ref-RFC5322">RFC5322</a>] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", <a href="./rfc5322">RFC 5322</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC5750">RFC5750</a>] Ramsdell, B. and S. Turner, "Secure/Multipurpose Internet
Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Certificate
Handling", <a href="./rfc5750">RFC 5750</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC5750, January 2010,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5750">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5750</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC5751">RFC5751</a>] Ramsdell, B. and S. Turner, "Secure/Multipurpose Internet
Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Message
Specification", <a href="./rfc5751">RFC 5751</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC5751, January
2010, <<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5751">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5751</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC6376">RFC6376</a>] Crocker, D., Ed., Hansen, T., Ed., and M. Kucherawy, Ed.,
"DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", STD 76,
<a href="./rfc6376">RFC 6376</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC6376, September 2011,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6376">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6376</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC6409">RFC6409</a>] Gellens, R. and J. Klensin, "Message Submission for Mail",
STD 72, <a href="./rfc6409">RFC 6409</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC6409, November 2011,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6409">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6409</a>>.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-8.2" href="#section-8.2">8.2</a>. Informative References</span>
[<a id="ref-RFC3864">RFC3864</a>] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, "Registration
Procedures for Message Header Fields", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp90">BCP 90</a>, <a href="./rfc3864">RFC 3864</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3864, September 2004,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3864">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3864</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC5752">RFC5752</a>] Turner, S. and J. Schaad, "Multiple Signatures in
Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", <a href="./rfc5752">RFC 5752</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5752, January 2010,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5752">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5752</a>>.
[<a id="ref-STANAG-4406">STANAG-4406</a>]
NATO, "STANAG 4406 Edition 2: Military Message Handling
System", STANAG 4406 Ed. 2, March 2005.
<span class="grey">Melnikov Informational [Page 10]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-11" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7912">RFC 7912</a> Message Authorizing Header Field June 2016</span>
Acknowledgements
Many thanks for reviews and text provided by Steve Kille, Jim Schaad,
Russ Housley, David Wilson, Chris Bonatti, and Sean Turner.
Some text in this document was copied from <a href="./rfc7001">RFC 7001</a>.
Author's Address
Alexey Melnikov
Isode Ltd
14 Castle Mews
Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2NP
United Kingdom
Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com
Melnikov Informational [Page 11]
</pre>
|
