RFC4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2
4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2. R. Shirey. August 2007. (Format: TXT=867626 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC2828) (Also FYI0036) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
日本語訳
RFC一覧
参照
Network Working Group R. Shirey
Request for Comments: 4949 August 2007
FYI: 36
Obsoletes: 2828
Category: Informational
Internet Security Glossary, Version 2
Status of This Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
RFC Editor Note
This document is both a major revision and a major expansion of the
Security Glossary in RFC 2828. This revised Glossary is an extensive
reference that should help the Internet community to improve the
clarity of documentation and discussion in an important area of
Internet technology. However, readers should be aware of the
following:
(1) The recommendations and some particular interpretations in
definitions are those of the author, not an official IETF position.
The IETF has not taken a formal position either for or against
recommendations made by this Glossary, and the use of RFC 2119
language (e.g., SHOULD NOT) in the Glossary must be understood as
unofficial. In other words, the usage rules, wording interpretations,
and other recommendations that the Glossary offers are personal
opinions of the Glossary's author. Readers must judge for themselves
whether or not to follow his recommendations, based on their own
knowledge combined with the reasoning presented in the Glossary.
(2) The glossary is rich in the history of early network security
work, but it may be somewhat incomplete in describing recent security
work, which has been developing rapidly.
Shirey Informational [Page 1]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Abstract
This Glossary provides definitions, abbreviations, and explanations
of terminology for information system security. The 334 pages of
entries offer recommendations to improve the comprehensibility of
written material that is generated in the Internet Standards Process
(RFC 2026). The recommendations follow the principles that such
writing should (a) use the same term or definition whenever the same
concept is mentioned; (b) use terms in their plainest, dictionary
sense; (c) use terms that are already well-established in open
publications; and (d) avoid terms that either favor a particular
vendor or favor a particular technology or mechanism over other,
competing techniques that already exist or could be developed.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Format of Entries ...............................................4
2.1. Order of Entries ...........................................4
2.2. Capitalization and Abbreviations ...........................5
2.3. Support for Automated Searching ............................5
2.4. Definition Type and Context ................................5
2.5. Explanatory Notes ..........................................6
2.6. Cross-References ...........................................6
2.7. Trademarks .................................................6
2.8. The New Punctuation ........................................6
3. Types of Entries ................................................7
3.1. Type "I": Recommended Definitions of Internet Origin .......7
3.2. Type "N": Recommended Definitions of Non-Internet Origin ...8
3.3. Type "O": Other Terms and Definitions To Be Noted ..........8
3.4. Type "D": Deprecated Terms and Definitions .................8
3.5. Definition Substitutions ...................................8
4. Definitions .....................................................9
5. Security Considerations .......................................343
6. Normative Reference ...........................................343
7. Informative References ........................................343
8. Acknowledgments ...............................................364
Shirey Informational [Page 2]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
1. Introduction
This Glossary is *not* an Internet Standard, and its recommendations
represent only the opinions of its author. However, this Glossary
gives reasons for its recommendations -- especially for the SHOULD
NOTs -- so that readers can judge for themselves what to do.
This Glossary provides an internally consistent and self-contained
set of terms, abbreviations, and definitions -- supported by
explanations, recommendations, and references -- for terminology that
concerns information system security. The intent of this Glossary is
to improve the comprehensibility of written materials that are
generated in the Internet Standards Process (RFC 2026) -- i.e., RFCs,
Internet-Drafts, and other items of discourse -- which are referred
to here as IDOCs. A few non-security, networking terms are included
to make the Glossary self-contained, but more complete glossaries of
such terms are available elsewhere [A1523, F1037, R1208, R1983].
This Glossary supports the goals of the Internet Standards Process:
o Clear, Concise, Easily Understood Documentation
This Glossary seeks to improve comprehensibility of security-
related content of IDOCs. That requires wording to be clear and
understandable, and requires the set of security-related terms and
definitions to be consistent and self-supporting. Also,
terminology needs to be uniform across all IDOCs; i.e., the same
term or definition needs to be used whenever and wherever the same
concept is mentioned. Harmonization of existing IDOCs need not be
done immediately, but it is desirable to correct and standardize
terminology when new versions are issued in the normal course of
standards development and evolution.
o Technical Excellence
Just as Internet Standard (STD) protocols should operate
effectively, IDOCs should use terminology accurately, precisely,
and unambiguously to enable standards to be implemented correctly.
o Prior Implementation and Testing
Just as STD protocols require demonstrated experience and
stability before adoption, IDOCs need to use well-established
language; and the robustness principle for protocols -- "be
liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send" --
is also applicable to the language used in IDOCs that describe
protocols. Using terms in their plainest, dictionary sense (when
appropriate) helps to make them more easily understood by
Shirey Informational [Page 3]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
international readers. IDOCs need to avoid using private, newly
invented terms in place of generally accepted terms from open
publications. IDOCs need to avoid substituting new definitions
that conflict with established ones. IDOCs need to avoid using
"cute" synonyms (e.g., "Green Book"), because no matter how
popular a nickname may be in one community, it is likely to cause
confusion in another.
However, although this Glossary strives for plain, internationally
understood English language, its terms and definitions are biased
toward English as used in the United States of America (U.S.).
Also, with regard to terminology used by national governments and
in national defense areas, the glossary addresses only U.S. usage.
o Openness, Fairness, and Timeliness
IDOCs need to avoid using proprietary and trademarked terms for
purposes other than referring to those particular systems. IDOCs
also need to avoid terms that either favor a particular vendor or
favor a particular security technology or mechanism over other,
competing techniques that already exist or might be developed in
the future. The set of terminology used across the set of IDOCs
needs to be flexible and adaptable as the state of Internet
security art evolves.
In support of those goals, this Glossary offers guidance by marking
terms and definitions as being either endorsed or deprecated for use
in IDOCs. The key words "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY",
and "OPTIONAL" are intended to be interpreted the same way as in an
Internet Standard (i.e., as specified in RFC 2119 [R2119]). Other
glossaries (e.g., [Raym]) list additional terms that deal with
Internet security but have not been included in this Glossary because
they are not appropriate for IDOCs.
2. Format of Entries
Section 4 presents Glossary entries in the following manner:
2.1. Order of Entries
Entries are sorted in lexicographic order, without regard to
capitalization. Numeric digits are treated as preceding alphabetic
characters, and special characters are treated as preceding digits.
Blanks are treated as preceding non-blank characters, except that a
hyphen or slash between the parts of a multiword entry (e.g.,
"RED/BLACK separation") is treated like a blank.
Shirey Informational [Page 4]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
If an entry has multiple definitions (e.g., "domain"), they are
numbered beginning with "1", and any of those multiple definitions
that are RECOMMENDED for use in IDOCs are presented before other
definitions for that entry. If definitions are closely related (e.g.,
"threat"), they are denoted by adding letters to a number, such as
"1a" and "1b".
2.2. Capitalization and Abbreviations
Entries that are proper nouns are capitalized (e.g., "Data Encryption
Algorithm"), as are other words derived from proper nouns (e.g.,
"Caesar cipher"). All other entries are not capitalized (e.g.,
"certification authority"). Each acronym or other abbreviation that
appears in this Glossary, either as an entry or in a definition or
explanation, is defined in this Glossary, except items of common
English usage, such as "a.k.a.", "e.g.", "etc.", "i.e.", "vol.",
"pp.", and "U.S.".
2.3. Support for Automated Searching
Each entry is preceded by a dollar sign ($) and a space. This makes
it possible to find the defining entry for an item "X" by searching
for the character string "$ X", without stopping at other entries in
which "X" is used in explanations.
2.4. Definition Type and Context
Each entry is preceded by a character -- I, N, O, or D -- enclosed in
parentheses, to indicate the type of definition (as is explained
further in Section 3):
- "I" for a RECOMMENDED term or definition of Internet origin.
- "N" if RECOMMENDED but not of Internet origin.
- "O" for a term or definition that is NOT recommended for use in
IDOCs but is something that authors of Internet documents should
know about.
- "D" for a term or definition that is deprecated and SHOULD NOT be
used in Internet documents.
If a definition is valid only in a specific context (e.g.,
"baggage"), that context is shown immediately following the
definition type and is enclosed by a pair of slash symbols (/). If
the definition is valid only for specific parts of speech, that is
shown in the same way (e.g., "archive").
Shirey Informational [Page 5]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2.5. Explanatory Notes
Some entries have explanatory text that is introduced by one or more
of the following keywords:
- Deprecated Abbreviation (e.g., "AA")
- Deprecated Definition (e.g., "digital certification")
- Deprecated Usage (e.g., "authenticate")
- Deprecated Term (e.g., "certificate authority")
- Pronunciation (e.g., "*-property")
- Derivation (e.g., "discretionary access control")
- Tutorial (e.g., "accreditation")
- Example (e.g., "back door")
- Usage (e.g., "access")
Explanatory text in this Glossary MAY be reused in IDOCs. However,
this text is not intended to authoritatively supersede text of an
IDOC in which the Glossary entry is already used.
2.6. Cross-References
Some entries contain a parenthetical remark of the form "(See: X.)",
where X is a list of other, related terms. Some entries contain a
remark of the form "(Compare: X)", where X is a list of terms that
either are antonyms of the entry or differ in some other manner worth
noting.
2.7. Trademarks
All servicemarks and trademarks that appear in this Glossary are used
in an editorial fashion and to the benefit of the mark owner, without
any intention of infringement.
2.8. The New Punctuation
This Glossary uses the "new" or "logical" punctuation style favored
by computer programmers, as described by Raymond [Raym]: Programmers
use pairs of quotation marks the same way they use pairs of
parentheses, i.e., as balanced delimiters. For example, if "Alice
sends" is a phrase, and so are "Bill receives" and "Eve listens",
then a programmer would write the following sentence:
"Alice sends", "Bill receives", and "Eve listens".
According to standard American usage, the punctuation in that
sentence is incorrect; the continuation commas and the final period
should go inside the string quotes, like this:
"Alice sends," "Bill receives," and "Eve listens."
Shirey Informational [Page 6]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
However, a programmer would not include a character in a literal
string if the character did not belong there, because that could
cause an error. For example, suppose a sentence in a draft of a
tutorial on the vi editing language looked like this:
Then delete one line from the file by typing "dd".
A book editor following standard usage might change the sentence to
look like this:
Then delete one line from the file by typing "dd."
However, in the vi language, the dot character repeats the last
command accepted. So, if a reader entered "dd.", two lines would be
deleted instead of one.
Similarly, use of standard American punctuation might cause
misunderstanding in entries in this Glossary. Thus, the new
punctuation is used here, and we recommend it for IDOCs.
3. Types of Entries
Each entry in this Glossary is marked as type I, N, O, or D:
3.1. Type "I": Recommended Definitions of Internet Origin
The marking "I" indicates two things:
- Origin: "I" (as opposed to "N") means either that the Internet
Standards Process or Internet community is authoritative for the
definition *or* that the term is sufficiently generic that this
Glossary can freely state a definition without contradicting a
non-Internet authority (e.g., "attack").
- Recommendation: "I" (as opposed to "O") means that the term and
definition are RECOMMENDED for use in IDOCs. However, some "I"
entries may be accompanied by a "Usage" note that states a
limitation (e.g., "certification"), and IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the
defined term outside that limited context.
Many "I" entries are proper nouns (e.g., "Internet Protocol") for
which the definition is intended only to provide basic information;
i.e., the authoritative definition of such terms is found elsewhere.
For a proper noun described as an "Internet protocol", please refer
to the current edition of "Internet Official Protocol Standards"
(Standard 1) for the standardization status of the protocol.
Shirey Informational [Page 7]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
3.2. Type "N": Recommended Definitions of Non-Internet Origin
The marking "N" indicates two things:
- Origin: "N" (as opposed to "I") means that the entry has a non-
Internet basis or origin.
- Recommendation: "N" (as opposed to "O") means that the term and
definition are RECOMMENDED for use in IDOCs, if they are needed at
all in IDOCs. Many of these entries are accompanied by a label
that states a context (e.g., "package") or a note that states a
limitation (e.g., "data integrity"), and IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the
defined term outside that context or limit. Some of the contexts
are rarely if ever expected to occur in an IDOC (e.g., "baggage").
In those cases, the listing exists to make Internet authors aware
of the non-Internet usage so that they can avoid conflicts with
non-Internet documents.
3.3. Type "O": Other Terms and Definitions To Be Noted
The marking "O" means that the definition is of non-Internet origin
and SHOULD NOT be used in IDOCs *except* in cases where the term is
specifically identified as non-Internet.
For example, an IDOC might mention "BCA" (see: brand certification
authority) or "baggage" as an example of some concept; in that case,
the document should specifically say "SET(trademark) BCA" or
"SET(trademark) baggage" and include the definition of the term.
3.4. Type "D": Deprecated Terms and Definitions
If this Glossary recommends that a term or definition SHOULD NOT be
used in IDOCs, then the entry is marked as type "D", and an
explanatory note -- "Deprecated Term", "Deprecated Abbreviation",
"Deprecated Definition", or "Deprecated Usage" -- is provided.
3.5. Definition Substitutions
Some terms have a definition published by a non-Internet authority --
a government (e.g., "object reuse"), an industry (e.g., "Secure Data
Exchange"), a national authority (e.g., "Data Encryption Standard"),
or an international body (e.g., "data confidentiality") -- that is
suitable for use in IDOCs. In those cases, this Glossary marks the
definition "N", recommending its use in Internet documents.
Other such terms have definitions that are inadequate or
inappropriate for IDOCs. For example, a definition might be outdated
or too narrow, or it might need clarification by substituting more
careful wording (e.g., "authentication exchange") or explanations,
using other terms that are defined in this Glossary. In those cases,
Shirey Informational [Page 8]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
this Glossary marks the entry "O", and provides an "I" or "N" entry
that precedes, and is intended to supersede, the "O" entry.
In some cases where this Glossary provides a definition to supersede
an "O" definition, the substitute is intended to subsume the meaning
of the "O" entry and not conflict with it. For the term "security
service", for example, the "O" definition deals narrowly with only
communication services provided by layers in the OSIRM and is
inadequate for the full range of IDOC usage, while the new "I"
definition provided by this Glossary can be used in more situations
and for more kinds of service. However, the "O" definition is also
listed so that IDOC authors will be aware of the context in which the
term is used more narrowly.
When making substitutions, this Glossary attempts to avoid
contradicting any non-Internet authority. Still, terminology differs
between authorities such as the American Bar Association, OSI, SET,
the U.S. DoD, and other authorities; and this Glossary probably is
not exactly aligned with any of them.
4. Definitions
$ *-property
(N) Synonym for "confinement property" in the context of the Bell-
LaPadula model. Pronunciation: star property.
$ 3DES
(N) See: Triple Data Encryption Algorithm.
$ A1 computer system
(O) /TCSEC/ See: Tutorial under "Trusted Computer System
Evaluation Criteria". (Compare: beyond A1.)
$ AA
(D) See: Deprecated Usage under "attribute authority".
$ ABA Guidelines
(N) "American Bar Association (ABA) Digital Signature Guidelines"
[DSG], a framework of legal principles for using digital
signatures and digital certificates in electronic commerce.
$ Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1)
(N) A standard for describing data objects. [Larm, X680] (See:
CMS.)
Usage: IDOCs SHOULD use the term "ASN.1" narrowly to describe the
notation or language called "Abstract Syntax Notation One". IDOCs
MAY use the term more broadly to encompass the notation, its
Shirey Informational [Page 9]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
associated encoding rules (see: BER), and software tools that
assist in its use, when the context makes this meaning clear.
Tutorial: OSIRM defines computer network functionality in layers.
Protocols and data objects at higher layers are abstractly defined
to be implemented using protocols and data objects from lower
layers. A higher layer may define transfers of abstract objects
between computers, and a lower layer may define those transfers
concretely as strings of bits. Syntax is needed to specify data
formats of abstract objects, and encoding rules are needed to
transform abstract objects into bit strings at lower layers. OSI
standards use ASN.1 for those specifications and use various
encoding rules for those transformations. (See: BER.)
In ASN.1, formal names are written without spaces, and separate
words in a name are indicated by capitalizing the first letter of
each word except the first word. For example, the name of a CRL is
"certificateRevocationList".
$ ACC
(I) See: access control center.
$ acceptable risk
(I) A risk that is understood and tolerated by a system's user,
operator, owner, or accreditor, usually because the cost or
difficulty of implementing an effective countermeasure for the
associated vulnerability exceeds the expectation of loss. (See:
adequate security, risk, "second law" under "Courtney's laws".)
$ access
1a. (I) The ability and means to communicate with or otherwise
interact with a system to use system resources either to handle
information or to gain knowledge of the information the system
contains. (Compare: handle.)
Usage: The definition is intended to include all types of
communication with a system, including one-way communication in
either direction. In actual practice, however, passive users might
be treated as not having "access" and, therefore, be exempt from
most requirements of the system's security policy. (See: "passive
user" under "user".)
1b. (O) "Opportunity to make use of an information system (IS)
resource." [C4009]
2. (O) /formal model/ "A specific type of interaction between a
subject and an object that results in the flow of information from
one to the other." [NCS04]
Shirey Informational [Page 10]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Access Certificate for Electronic Services (ACES)
(O) A PKI operated by the U.S. Government's General Services
Administration in cooperation with industry partners. (See: CAM.)
$ access control
1. (I) Protection of system resources against unauthorized access.
2. (I) A process by which use of system resources is regulated
according to a security policy and is permitted only by authorized
entities (users, programs, processes, or other systems) according
to that policy. (See: access, access control service, computer
security, discretionary access control, mandatory access control,
role-based access control.)
3. (I) /formal model/ Limitations on interactions between subjects
and objects in an information system.
4. (O) "The prevention of unauthorized use of a resource,
including the prevention of use of a resource in an unauthorized
manner." [I7498-2]
5. (O) /U.S. Government/ A system using physical, electronic, or
human controls to identify or admit personnel with properly
authorized access to a SCIF.
$ access control center (ACC)
(I) A computer that maintains a database (possibly in the form of
an access control matrix) defining the security policy for an
access control service, and that acts as a server for clients
requesting access control decisions.
Tutorial: An ACC is sometimes used in conjunction with a key
center to implement access control in a key-distribution system
for symmetric cryptography. (See: BLACKER, Kerberos.)
$ access control list (ACL)
(I) /information system/ A mechanism that implements access
control for a system resource by enumerating the system entities
that are permitted to access the resource and stating, either
implicitly or explicitly, the access modes granted to each entity.
(Compare: access control matrix, access list, access profile,
capability list.)
$ access control matrix
(I) A rectangular array of cells, with one row per subject and one
column per object. The entry in a cell -- that is, the entry for a
particular subject-object pair -- indicates the access mode that
the subject is permitted to exercise on the object. Each column is
Shirey Informational [Page 11]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
equivalent to an "access control list" for the object; and each
row is equivalent to an "access profile" for the subject.
$ access control service
(I) A security service that protects against a system entity using
a system resource in a way not authorized by the system's security
policy. (See: access control, discretionary access control,
identity-based security policy, mandatory access control, rule-
based security policy.)
Tutorial: This service includes protecting against use of a
resource in an unauthorized manner by an entity (i.e., a
principal) that is authorized to use the resource in some other
manner. (See: insider.) The two basic mechanisms for implementing
this service are ACLs and tickets.
$ access level
1. (D) Synonym for the hierarchical "classification level" in a
security level. [C4009] (See: security level.)
2. (D) Synonym for "clearance level".
Deprecated Definitions: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with these
definitions because they duplicate the meaning of more specific
terms. Any IDOC that uses this term SHOULD provide a specific
definition for it because access control may be based on many
attributes other than classification level and clearance level.
$ access list
(I) /physical security/ Roster of persons who are authorized to
enter a controlled area. (Compare: access control list.)
$ access mode
(I) A distinct type of data processing operation (e.g., read,
write, append, or execute, or a combination of operations) that a
subject can potentially perform on an object in an information
system. [Huff] (See: read, write.)
$ access policy
(I) A kind of "security policy". (See: access, access control.)
$ access profile
(O) Synonym for "capability list".
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it
because the definition is not widely known.
Shirey Informational [Page 12]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ access right
(I) Synonym for "authorization"; emphasizes the possession of the
authorization by a system entity.
$ accountability
(I) The property of a system or system resource that ensures that
the actions of a system entity may be traced uniquely to that
entity, which can then be held responsible for its actions. [Huff]
(See: audit service.)
Tutorial: Accountability (a.k.a. individual accountability)
typically requires a system ability to positively associate the
identity of a user with the time, method, and mode of the user's
access to the system. This ability supports detection and
subsequent investigation of security breaches. Individual persons
who are system users are held accountable for their actions after
being notified of the rules of behavior for using the system and
the penalties associated with violating those rules.
$ accounting See: COMSEC accounting.
$ accounting legend code (ALC)
(O) /U.S. Government/ Numeric system used to indicate the minimum
accounting controls required for items of COMSEC material within
the CMCS. [C4009] (See: COMSEC accounting.)
$ accreditation
(N) An administrative action by which a designated authority
declares that an information system is approved to operate in a
particular security configuration with a prescribed set of
safeguards. [FP102, SP37] (See: certification.)
Tutorial: An accreditation is usually based on a technical
certification of the system's security mechanisms. To accredit a
system, the approving authority must determine that any residual
risk is an acceptable risk. Although the terms "certification" and
"accreditation" are used more in the U.S. DoD and other U.S.
Government agencies than in commercial organizations, the concepts
apply any place where managers are required to deal with and
accept responsibility for security risks. For example, the
American Bar Association is developing accreditation criteria for
CAs.
$ accreditation boundary
(O) Synonym for "security perimeter". [C4009]
Shirey Informational [Page 13]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ accreditor
(N) A management official who has been designated to have the
formal authority to "accredit" an information system, i.e., to
authorize the operation of, and the processing of sensitive data
in, the system and to accept the residual risk associated with the
system. (See: accreditation, residual risk.)
$ ACES
(O) See: Access Certificate for Electronic Services.
$ ACL
(I) See: access control list.
$ acquirer
1. (O) /SET/ "The financial institution that establishes an
account with a merchant and processes payment card authorizations
and payments." [SET1]
2. (O) /SET/ "The institution (or its agent) that acquires from
the card acceptor the financial data relating to the transaction
and initiates that data into an interchange system." [SET2]
$ activation data
(N) Secret data, other than keys, that is required to access a
cryptographic module. (See: CIK. Compare: initialization value.)
$ active attack
(I) See: secondary definition under "attack".
$ active content
1a. (I) Executable software that is bound to a document or other
data file and that executes automatically when a user accesses the
file, without explicit initiation by the user. (Compare: mobile
code.)
Tutorial: Active content can be mobile code when its associated
file is transferred across a network.
1b. (O) "Electronic documents that can carry out or trigger
actions automatically on a computer platform without the
intervention of a user. [This technology enables] mobile code
associated with a document to execute as the document is
rendered." [SP28]
$ active user
(I) See: secondary definition under "system user".
Shirey Informational [Page 14]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ active wiretapping
(I) A wiretapping attack that attempts to alter data being
communicated or otherwise affect data flow. (See: wiretapping.
Compare: active attack, passive wiretapping.)
$ add-on security
(N) The retrofitting of protection mechanisms, implemented by
hardware or software, in an information system after the system
has become operational. [FP039] (Compare: baked-in security.)
$ adequate security
(O) /U.S. DoD/ "Security commensurate with the risk and magnitude
of harm resulting from the loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to
or modification of information." (See: acceptable risk, residual
risk.)
$ administrative security
1. (I) Management procedures and constraints to prevent
unauthorized access to a system. (See: "third law" under
"Courtney's laws", manager, operational security, procedural
security, security architecture. Compare: technical security.)
Examples: Clear delineation and separation of duties;
configuration control.
Usage: Administrative security is usually understood to consist of
methods and mechanisms that are implemented and executed primarily
by people, rather than by automated systems.
2. (O) "The management constraints, operational procedures,
accountability procedures, and supplemental controls established
to provide an acceptable level of protection for sensitive data."
[FP039]
$ administrator
1. (O) /Common Criteria/ A person that is responsible for
configuring, maintaining, and administering the TOE in a correct
manner for maximum security. (See: administrative security.)
2. (O) /ITSEC/ A person in contact with the TOE, who is
responsible for maintaining its operational capability.
$ Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
(N) A U.S. Government standard [FP197] (the successor to DES) that
(a) specifies "the AES algorithm", which is a symmetric block
cipher that is based on Rijndael and uses key sizes of 128, 192,
or 256 bits to operate on a 128-bit block, and (b) states policy
for using that algorithm to protect unclassified, sensitive data.
Shirey Informational [Page 15]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Rijndael was designed to handle additional block sizes
and key lengths that were not adopted in the AES. Rijndael was
selected by NIST through a public competition that was held to
find a successor to the DEA; the other finalists were MARS, RC6,
Serpent, and Twofish.
$ adversary
1. (I) An entity that attacks a system. (Compare: cracker,
intruder, hacker.)
2. (I) An entity that is a threat to a system.
$ AES
(N) See: Advanced Encryption Standard.
$ Affirm
(O) A formal methodology, language, and integrated set of software
tools developed at the University of Southern California's
Information Sciences Institute for specifying, coding, and
verifying software to produce correct and reliable programs.
[Cheh]
$ aggregation
(I) A circumstance in which a collection of information items is
required to be classified at a higher security level than any of
the items is classified individually. (See: classification.)
$ AH
(I) See: Authentication Header
$ air gap
(I) An interface between two systems at which (a) they are not
connected physically and (b) any logical connection is not
automated (i.e., data is transferred through the interface only
manually, under human control). (See: sneaker net. Compare:
gateway.)
Example: Computer A and computer B are on opposite sides of a
room. To move data from A to B, a person carries a disk across the
room. If A and B operate in different security domains, then
moving data across the air gap may involve an upgrade or downgrade
operation.
$ ALC
(O) See: accounting legend code.
Shirey Informational [Page 16]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ algorithm
(I) A finite set of step-by-step instructions for a problem-
solving or computation procedure, especially one that can be
implemented by a computer. (See: cryptographic algorithm.)
$ alias
(I) A name that an entity uses in place of its real name, usually
for the purpose of either anonymity or masquerade.
$ Alice and Bob
(I) The parties that are most often called upon to illustrate the
operation of bipartite security protocols. These and other
dramatis personae are listed by Schneier [Schn].
$ American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
(N) A private, not-for-profit association that administers U.S.
private-sector voluntary standards.
Tutorial: ANSI has approximately 1,000 member organizations,
including equipment users, manufacturers, and others. These
include commercial firms, governmental agencies, and other
institutions and international entities.
ANSI is the sole U.S. representative to (a) ISO and (b) (via the
U.S. National Committee) the International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC), which are the two major, non-treaty,
international standards organizations.
ANSI provides a forum for ANSI-accredited standards development
groups. Among those groups, the following are especially relevant
to Internet security:
- International Committee for Information Technology
Standardization (INCITS) (formerly X3): Primary U.S. focus of
standardization in information and communications technologies,
encompassing storage, processing, transfer, display,
management, organization, and retrieval of information.
Example: [A3092].
- Accredited Standards Committee X9: Develops, establishes,
maintains, and promotes standards for the financial services
industry. Example: [A9009].
- Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS):
Develops standards, specifications, guidelines, requirements,
technical reports, industry processes, and verification tests
for interoperability and reliability of telecommunications
networks, equipment, and software. Example: [A1523].
Shirey Informational [Page 17]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)
(N) A scheme that encodes 128 specified characters -- the numbers
0-9, the letters a-z and A-Z, some basic punctuation symbols, some
control codes that originated with Teletype machines, and a blank
space -- into the 7-bit binary integers. Forms the basis of the
character set representations used in most computers and many
Internet standards. [FP001] (See: code.)
$ Anderson report
(O) A 1972 study of computer security that was written by James P.
Anderson for the U.S. Air Force [Ande].
Tutorial: Anderson collaborated with a panel of experts to study
Air Force requirements for multilevel security. The study
recommended research and development that was urgently needed to
provide secure information processing for command and control
systems and support systems. The report introduced the reference
monitor concept and provided development impetus for computer and
network security technology. However, many of the security
problems that the 1972 report called "current" still plague
information systems today.
$ anomaly detection
(I) An intrusion detection method that searches for activity that
is different from the normal behavior of system entities and
system resources. (See: IDS. Compare: misuse detection.)
$ anonymity
(I) The condition of an identity being unknown or concealed. (See:
alias, anonymizer, anonymous credential, anonymous login,
identity, onion routing, persona certificate. Compare: privacy.)
Tutorial: An application may require security services that
maintain anonymity of users or other system entities, perhaps to
preserve their privacy or hide them from attack. To hide an
entity's real name, an alias may be used; for example, a financial
institution may assign account numbers. Parties to transactions
can thus remain relatively anonymous, but can also accept the
transactions as legitimate. Real names of the parties cannot be
easily determined by observers of the transactions, but an
authorized third party may be able to map an alias to a real name,
such as by presenting the institution with a court order. In other
applications, anonymous entities may be completely untraceable.
$ anonymizer
(I) An internetwork service, usually provided via a proxy server,
that provides anonymity and privacy for clients. That is, the
service enables a client to access servers (a) without allowing
Shirey Informational [Page 18]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
anyone to gather information about which servers the client
accesses and (b) without allowing the accessed servers to gather
information about the client, such as its IP address.
$ anonymous credential
(D) /U.S. Government/ A credential that (a) can be used to
authenticate a person as having a specific attribute or being a
member of a specific group (e.g., military veterans or U.S.
citizens) but (b) does not reveal the individual identity of the
person that presents the credential. [M0404] (See: anonymity.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it mixes concepts
in a potentially misleading way. For example, when the credential
is an X.509 certificate, the term could be misunderstood to mean
that the certificate was signed by a CA that has a persona
certificate. Instead, use "attribute certificate", "organizational
certificate", or "persona certificate" depending on what is meant,
and provide additional explanations as needed.
$ anonymous login
(I) An access control feature (actually, an access control
vulnerability) in many Internet hosts that enables users to gain
access to general-purpose or public services and resources of a
host (such as allowing any user to transfer data using FTP)
without having a pre-established, identity-specific account (i.e.,
user name and password). (See: anonymity.)
Tutorial: This feature exposes a system to more threats than when
all the users are known, pre-registered entities that are
individually accountable for their actions. A user logs in using a
special, publicly known user name (e.g., "anonymous", "guest", or
"ftp"). To use the public login name, the user is not required to
know a secret password and may not be required to input anything
at all except the name. In other cases, to complete the normal
sequence of steps in a login protocol, the system may require the
user to input a matching, publicly known password (such as
"anonymous") or may ask the user for an e-mail address or some
other arbitrary character string.
$ ANSI
(N) See: American National Standards Institute.
$ anti-jam
(N) "Measures ensuring that transmitted information can be
received despite deliberate jamming attempts." [C4009] (See:
electronic security, frequency hopping, jam, spread spectrum.)
Shirey Informational [Page 19]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ apex trust anchor
(N) The trust anchor that is superior to all other trust anchors
in a particular system or context. (See: trust anchor, top CA.)
$ API
(I) See: application programming interface.
$ APOP
(I) See: POP3 APOP.
$ Application Layer
See: Internet Protocol Suite, OSIRM.
$ application program
(I) A computer program that performs a specific function directly
for a user (as opposed to a program that is part of a computer
operating system and exists to perform functions in support of
application programs).
$ architecture
(I) See: security architecture, system architecture.
$ archive
1a. (I) /noun/ A collection of data that is stored for a
relatively long period of time for historical and other purposes,
such as to support audit service, availability service, or system
integrity service. (Compare: backup, repository.)
1b. (I) /verb/ To store data in such a way as to create an
archive. (Compare: back up.)
Tutorial: A digital signature may need to be verified many years
after the signing occurs. The CA -- the one that issued the
certificate containing the public key needed to verify that
signature -- may not stay in operation that long. So every CA
needs to provide for long-term storage of the information needed
to verify the signatures of those to whom it issues certificates.
$ ARPANET
(I) Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) Network, a pioneer
packet-switched network that (a) was designed, implemented,
operated, and maintained by BBN from January 1969 until July 1975
under contract to the U.S. Government; (b) led to the development
of today's Internet; and (c) was decommissioned in June 1990.
[B4799, Hafn]
$ ASCII
(N) See: American Standard Code for Information Interchange.
Shirey Informational [Page 20]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ ASN.1
(N) See: Abstract Syntax Notation One.
$ asset
(I) A system resource that is (a) required to be protected by an
information system's security policy, (b) intended to be protected
by a countermeasure, or (c) required for a system's mission.
$ association
(I) A cooperative relationship between system entities, usually
for the purpose of transferring information between them. (See:
security association.)
$ assurance See: security assurance.
$ assurance level
(N) A rank on a hierarchical scale that judges the confidence
someone can have that a TOE adequately fulfills stated security
requirements. (See: assurance, certificate policy, EAL, TCSEC.)
Example: U.S. Government guidance [M0404] describes four assurance
levels for identity authentication, where each level "describes
the [U.S. Federal Government] agency's degree of certainty that
the user has presented [a credential] that refers to [the user's]
identity." In that guidance, assurance is defined as (a) "the
degree of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the
identity of the individual to whom the credential was issued" and
(b) "the degree of confidence that the individual who uses the
credential is the individual to whom the credential was issued."
The four levels are described as follows:
- Level 1: Little or no confidence in the asserted identity.
- Level 2: Some confidence in the asserted identity.
- Level 3: High confidence in the asserted identity.
- Level 4: Very high confidence in the asserted identity.
Standards for determining these levels are provided in a NIST
publication [SP12]. However, as noted there, an assurance level is
"a degree of confidence, not a true measure of how secure the
system actually is. This distinction is necessary because it is
extremely difficult -- and in many cases, virtually impossible --
to know exactly how secure a system is."
$ asymmetric cryptography
(I) A modern branch of cryptography (popularly known as "public-
key cryptography") in which the algorithms use a pair of keys (a
public key and a private key) and use a different component of the
pair for each of two counterpart cryptographic operations (e.g.,
Shirey Informational [Page 21]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
encryption and decryption, or signature creation and signature
verification). (See: key pair, symmetric cryptography.)
Tutorial: Asymmetric algorithms have key management advantages
over equivalently strong symmetric ones. First, one key of the
pair need not be known by anyone but its owner; so it can more
easily be kept secret. Second, although the other key is shared by
all entities that use the algorithm, that key need not be kept
secret from other, non-using entities; thus, the key-distribution
part of key management can be done more easily.
Asymmetric cryptography can be used to create algorithms for
encryption, digital signature, and key agreement:
- In an asymmetric encryption algorithm (e.g., "RSA"), when Alice
wants to ensure confidentiality for data she sends to Bob, she
encrypts the data with a public key provided by Bob. Only Bob
has the matching private key that is needed to decrypt the
data. (Compare: seal.)
- In an asymmetric digital signature algorithm (e.g., "DSA"),
when Alice wants to ensure data integrity or provide
authentication for data she sends to Bob, she uses her private
key to sign the data (i.e., create a digital signature based on
the data). To verify the signature, Bob uses the matching
public key that Alice has provided.
- In an asymmetric key-agreement algorithm (e.g., "Diffie-
Hellman-Merkle"), Alice and Bob each send their own public key
to the other party. Then each uses their own private key and
the other's public key to compute the new key value.
$ asymmetric key
(I) A cryptographic key that is used in an asymmetric
cryptographic algorithm. (See: asymmetric cryptography, private
key, public key.)
$ ATIS
(N) See: "Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions"
under "ANSI".
$ attack
1. (I) An intentional act by which an entity attempts to evade
security services and violate the security policy of a system.
That is, an actual assault on system security that derives from an
intelligent threat. (See: penetration, violation, vulnerability.)
2. (I) A method or technique used in an assault (e.g.,
masquerade). (See: blind attack, distributed attack.)
Shirey Informational [Page 22]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Attacks can be characterized according to intent:
- An "active attack" attempts to alter system resources or affect
their operation.
- A "passive attack" attempts to learn or make use of information
from a system but does not affect system resources of that
system. (See: wiretapping.)
The object of a passive attack might be to obtain data that is
needed for an off-line attack.
- An "off-line attack" is one in which the attacker obtains data
from the target system and then analyzes the data on a
different system of the attacker's own choosing, possibly in
preparation for a second stage of attack on the target.
Attacks can be characterized according to point of initiation:
- An "inside attack" is one that is initiated by an entity inside
the security perimeter (an "insider"), i.e., an entity that is
authorized to access system resources but uses them in a way
not approved by the party that granted the authorization.
- An "outside attack" is initiated from outside the security
perimeter, by an unauthorized or illegitimate user of the
system (an "outsider"). In the Internet, potential outside
attackers range from amateur pranksters to organized criminals,
international terrorists, and hostile governments.
Attacks can be characterized according to method of delivery:
- In a "direct attack", the attacker addresses attacking packets
to the intended victim(s).
- In an "indirect attack", the attacker addresses packets to a
third party, and the packets either have the address(es) of the
intended victim(s) as their source address(es) or indicate the
intended victim(s) in some other way. The third party responds
by sending one or more attacking packets to the intended
victims. The attacker can use third parties as attack
amplifiers by providing a broadcast address as the victim
address (e.g., "smurf attack"). (See: reflector attack.
Compare: reflection attack, replay attack.)
Shirey Informational [Page 23]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
The term "attack" relates to some other basic security terms as
shown in the following diagram:
+ - - - - - - - - - - - - + + - - - - + + - - - - - - - - - - -+
| An Attack: | |Counter- | | A System Resource: |
| i.e., A Threat Action | | measure | | Target of the Attack |
| +----------+ | | | | +-----------------+ |
| | Attacker |<==================||<========= | |
| | i.e., | Passive | | | | | Vulnerability | |
| | A Threat |<=================>||<========> | |
| | Agent | or Active | | | | +-------|||-------+ |
| +----------+ Attack | | | | VVV |
| | | | | Threat Consequences |
+ - - - - - - - - - - - - + + - - - - + + - - - - - - - - - - -+
$ attack potential
(I) The perceived likelihood of success should an attack be
launched, expressed in terms of the attacker's ability (i.e.,
expertise and resources) and motivation. (Compare: threat, risk.)
$ attack sensing, warning, and response
(I) A set of security services that cooperate with audit service
to detect and react to indications of threat actions, including
both inside and outside attacks. (See: indicator.)
$ attack tree
(I) A branching, hierarchical data structure that represents a set
of potential approaches to achieving an event in which system
security is penetrated or compromised in a specified way. [Moor]
Tutorial: Attack trees are special cases of fault trees. The
security incident that is the goal of the attack is represented as
the root node of the tree, and the ways that an attacker could
reach that goal are iteratively and incrementally represented as
branches and subnodes of the tree. Each subnode defines a subgoal,
and each subgoal may have its own set of further subgoals, etc.
The final nodes on the paths outward from the root, i.e., the leaf
nodes, represent different ways to initiate an attack. Each node
other than a leaf is either an AND-node or an OR-node. To achieve
the goal represented by an AND-node, the subgoals represented by
all of that node's subnodes must be achieved; and for an OR-node,
at least one of the subgoals must be achieved. Branches can be
labeled with values representing difficulty, cost, or other attack
attributes, so that alternative attacks can be compared.
Shirey Informational [Page 24]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ attribute
(N) Information of a particular type concerning an identifiable
system entity or object. An "attribute type" is the component of
an attribute that indicates the class of information given by the
attribute; and an "attribute value" is a particular instance of
the class of information indicated by an attribute type. (See:
attribute certificate.)
$ attribute authority (AA)
1. (N) A CA that issues attribute certificates.
2. (O) "An authority [that] assigns privileges by issuing
attribute certificates." [X509]
Deprecated Usage: The abbreviation "AA" SHOULD NOT be used in an
IDOC unless it is first defined in the IDOC.
$ attribute certificate
1. (I) A digital certificate that binds a set of descriptive data
items, other than a public key, either directly to a subject name
or to the identifier of another certificate that is a public-key
certificate. (See: capability token.)
2. (O) "A data structure, digitally signed by an [a]ttribute
[a]uthority, that binds some attribute values with identification
information about its holder." [X509]
Tutorial: A public-key certificate binds a subject name to a
public key value, along with information needed to perform certain
cryptographic functions using that key. Other attributes of a
subject, such as a security clearance, may be certified in a
separate kind of digital certificate, called an attribute
certificate. A subject may have multiple attribute certificates
associated with its name or with each of its public-key
certificates.
An attribute certificate might be issued to a subject in the
following situations:
- Different lifetimes: When the lifetime of an attribute binding
is shorter than that of the related public-key certificate, or
when it is desirable not to need to revoke a subject's public
key just to revoke an attribute.
- Different authorities: When the authority responsible for the
attributes is different than the one that issues the public-key
certificate for the subject. (There is no requirement that an
attribute certificate be issued by the same CA that issued the
associated public-key certificate.)
Shirey Informational [Page 25]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ audit
See: security audit.
$ audit log
(I) Synonym for "security audit trail".
$ audit service
(I) A security service that records information needed to
establish accountability for system events and for the actions of
system entities that cause them. (See: security audit.)
$ audit trail
(I) See: security audit trail.
$ AUTH
(I) See: POP3 AUTH.
$ authenticate
(I) Verify (i.e., establish the truth of) an attribute value
claimed by or for a system entity or system resource. (See:
authentication, validate vs. verify, "relationship between data
integrity service and authentication services" under "data
integrity service".)
Deprecated Usage: In general English usage, this term is used with
the meaning "to prove genuine" (e.g., an art expert authenticates
a Michelangelo painting); but IDOCs should restrict usage as
follows:
- IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term to refer to proving or checking
that data has not been changed, destroyed, or lost in an
unauthorized or accidental manner. Instead, use "verify".
- IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term to refer to proving the truth or
accuracy of a fact or value such as a digital signature.
Instead, use "verify".
- IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term to refer to establishing the
soundness or correctness of a construct, such as a digital
certificate. Instead, use "validate".
$ authentication
(I) The process of verifying a claim that a system entity or
system resource has a certain attribute value. (See: attribute,
authenticate, authentication exchange, authentication information,
credential, data origin authentication, peer entity
authentication, "relationship between data integrity service and
authentication services" under "data integrity service", simple
authentication, strong authentication, verification, X.509.)
Shirey Informational [Page 26]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Security services frequently depend on authentication of
the identity of users, but authentication may involve any type of
attribute that is recognized by a system. A claim may be made by a
subject about itself (e.g., at login, a user typically asserts its
identity) or a claim may be made on behalf of a subject or object
by some other system entity (e.g., a user may claim that a data
object originates from a specific source, or that a data object is
classified at a specific security level).
An authentication process consists of two basic steps:
- Identification step: Presenting the claimed attribute value
(e.g., a user identifier) to the authentication subsystem.
- Verification step: Presenting or generating authentication
information (e.g., a value signed with a private key) that acts
as evidence to prove the binding between the attribute and that
for which it is claimed. (See: verification.)
$ authentication code
(D) Synonym for a checksum based on cryptography. (Compare: Data
Authentication Code, Message Authentication Code.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this uncapitalized term as a
synonym for any kind of checksum, regardless of whether or not the
checksum is cryptographic. Instead, use "checksum", "Data
Authentication Code", "error detection code", "hash", "keyed
hash", "Message Authentication Code", "protected checksum", or
some other recommended term, depending on what is meant.
The term mixes concepts in a potentially misleading way. The word
"authentication" is misleading because the checksum may be used to
perform a data integrity function rather than a data origin
authentication function.
$ authentication exchange
1. (I) A mechanism to verify the identity of an entity by means of
information exchange.
2. (O) "A mechanism intended to ensure the identity of an entity
by means of information exchange." [I7498-2]
$ Authentication Header (AH)
(I) An Internet protocol [R2402, R4302] designed to provide
connectionless data integrity service and connectionless data
origin authentication service for IP datagrams, and (optionally)
to provide partial sequence integrity and protection against
replay attacks. (See: IPsec. Compare: ESP.)
Shirey Informational [Page 27]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Replay protection may be selected by the receiver when a
security association is established. AH authenticates the upper-
layer PDU that is carried as an IP SDU, and also authenticates as
much of the IP PCI (i.e., the IP header) as possible. However,
some IP header fields may change in transit, and the value of
these fields, when the packet arrives at the receiver, may not be
predictable by the sender. Thus, the values of such fields cannot
be protected end-to-end by AH; protection of the IP header by AH
is only partial when such fields are present.
AH may be used alone, or in combination with the ESP, or in a
nested fashion with tunneling. Security services can be provided
between a pair of communicating hosts, between a pair of
communicating security gateways, or between a host and a gateway.
ESP can provide nearly the same security services as AH, and ESP
can also provide data confidentiality service. The main difference
between authentication services provided by ESP and AH is the
extent of the coverage; ESP does not protect IP header fields
unless they are encapsulated by AH.
$ authentication information
(I) Information used to verify an identity claimed by or for an
entity. (See: authentication, credential, user. Compare:
identification information.)
Tutorial: Authentication information may exist as, or be derived
from, one of the following: (a) Something the entity knows (see:
password); (b) something the entity possesses (see: token); (c)
something the entity is (see: biometric authentication).
$ authentication service
(I) A security service that verifies an identity claimed by or for
an entity. (See: authentication.)
Tutorial: In a network, there are two general forms of
authentication service: data origin authentication service and
peer entity authentication service.
$ authenticity
(I) The property of being genuine and able to be verified and be
trusted. (See: authenticate, authentication, validate vs. verify.)
$ authority
(D) /PKI/ "An entity [that is] responsible for the issuance of
certificates." [X509]
Shirey Informational [Page 28]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
attribute authority, certification authority, registration
authority, or similar terms; the shortened form may cause
confusion. Instead, use the full term at the first instance of
usage and then, if it is necessary to shorten text, use AA, CA,
RA, and other abbreviations defined in this Glossary.
$ authority certificate
(D) "A certificate issued to an authority (e.g. either to a
certification authority or to an attribute authority)." [X509]
(See: authority.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because it is
ambiguous. Instead, use the full term "certification authority
certificate", "attribute authority certificate", "registration
authority certificate", etc. at the first instance of usage and
then, if it is necessary to shorten text, use AA, CA, RA, and
other abbreviations defined in this Glossary.
$ Authority Information Access extension
(I) The private extension defined by PKIX for X.509 certificates
to indicate "how to access CA information and services for the
issuer of the certificate in which the extension appears.
Information and services may include on-line validation services
and CA policy data." [R3280] (See: private extension.)
$ authorization
1a. (I) An approval that is granted to a system entity to access a
system resource. (Compare: permission, privilege.)
Usage: Some synonyms are "permission" and "privilege". Specific
terms are preferred in certain contexts:
- /PKI/ "Authorization" SHOULD be used, to align with
"certification authority" in the standard [X509].
- /role-based access control/ "Permission" SHOULD be used, to
align with the standard [ANSI].
- /computer operating systems/ "Privilege" SHOULD be used, to
align with the literature. (See: privileged process, privileged
user.)
Tutorial: The semantics and granularity of authorizations depend
on the application and implementation (see: "first law" under
"Courtney's laws"). An authorization may specify a particular
access mode -- such as read, write, or execute -- for one or more
system resources.
1b. (I) A process for granting approval to a system entity to
access a system resource.
Shirey Informational [Page 29]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (O) /SET/ "The process by which a properly appointed person or
persons grants permission to perform some action on behalf of an
organization. This process assesses transaction risk, confirms
that a given transaction does not raise the account holder's debt
above the account's credit limit, and reserves the specified
amount of credit. (When a merchant obtains authorization, payment
for the authorized amount is guaranteed -- provided, of course,
that the merchant followed the rules associated with the
authorization process.)" [SET2]
$ authorization credential
(I) See: /access control/ under "credential".
$ authorize
(I) Grant an authorization to a system entity.
$ authorized user
(I) /access control/ A system entity that accesses a system
resource for which the entity has received an authorization.
(Compare: insider, outsider, unauthorized user.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the term is used in many ways and could
easily be misunderstood.
$ automated information system
See: information system.
$ availability
1. (I) The property of a system or a system resource being
accessible, or usable or operational upon demand, by an authorized
system entity, according to performance specifications for the
system; i.e., a system is available if it provides services
according to the system design whenever users request them. (See:
critical, denial of service. Compare: precedence, reliability,
survivability.)
2. (O) "The property of being accessible and usable upon demand by
an authorized entity." [I7498-2]
3. (D) "Timely, reliable access to data and information services
for authorized users." [C4009]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the term with
definition 3; the definition mixes "availability" with
"reliability", which is a different property. (See: reliability.)
Shirey Informational [Page 30]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Availability requirements can be specified by
quantitative metrics, but sometimes are stated qualitatively, such
as in the following:
- "Flexible tolerance for delay" may mean that brief system
outages do not endanger mission accomplishment, but extended
outages may endanger the mission.
- "Minimum tolerance for delay" may mean that mission
accomplishment requires the system to provide requested
services in a short time.
$ availability service
(I) A security service that protects a system to ensure its
availability.
Tutorial: This service addresses the security concerns raised by
denial-of-service attacks. It depends on proper management and
control of system resources, and thus depends on access control
service and other security services.
$ avoidance
(I) See: secondary definition under "security".
$ B1, B2, or B3 computer system
(O) /TCSEC/ See: Tutorial under "Trusted Computer System
Evaluation Criteria".
$ back door
1. (I) /COMPUSEC/ A computer system feature -- which may be (a) an
unintentional flaw, (b) a mechanism deliberately installed by the
system's creator, or (c) a mechanism surreptitiously installed by
an intruder -- that provides access to a system resource by other
than the usual procedure and usually is hidden or otherwise not
well-known. (See: maintenance hook. Compare: Trojan Horse.)
Example: A way to access a computer other than through a normal
login. Such an access path is not necessarily designed with
malicious intent; operating systems sometimes are shipped by the
manufacturer with hidden accounts intended for use by field
service technicians or the vendor's maintenance programmers.
2. (I) /cryptography/ A feature of a cryptographic system that
makes it easily possible to break or circumvent the protection
that the system is designed to provide.
Example: A feature that makes it possible to decrypt cipher text
much more quickly than by brute-force cryptanalysis, without
having prior knowledge of the decryption key.
Shirey Informational [Page 31]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ back up
(I) /verb/ Create a reserve copy of data or, more generally,
provide alternate means to perform system functions despite loss
of system resources. (See: contingency plan. Compare: archive.)
$ backup
(I) /noun or adjective/ Refers to alternate means of performing
system functions despite loss of system resources. (See:
contingency plan).
Example: A reserve copy of data, preferably one that is stored
separately from the original, for use if the original becomes lost
or damaged. (Compare: archive.)
$ bagbiter
(D) /slang/ "An entity, such as a program or a computer, that
fails to work or that works in a remarkably clumsy manner. A
person who has caused some trouble, inadvertently or otherwise,
typically by failing to program the computer properly." [NCSSG]
(See: flaw.)
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for these concepts. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ baggage
(O) /SET/ An "opaque encrypted tuple, which is included in a SET
message but appended as external data to the PKCS encapsulated
data. This avoids superencryption of the previously encrypted
tuple, but guarantees linkage with the PKCS portion of the
message." [SET2]
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term to describe a
data element, except in the form "SET(trademark) baggage" with the
meaning given above.
$ baked-in security
(D) The inclusion of security mechanisms in an information system
beginning at an early point in the system's lifecycle, i.e.,
during the design phase, or at least early in the implementation
phase. (Compare: add-on security.)
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term (unless they also
provide a definition like this one). (See: Deprecated Usage under
"Green Book".)
Shirey Informational [Page 32]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ bandwidth
(I) The total width of the frequency band that is available to or
used by a communication channel; usually expressed in Hertz (Hz).
(RFC 3753) (Compare: channel capacity.)
$ bank identification number (BIN)
1. (O) The digits of a credit card number that identify the
issuing bank. (See: primary account number.)
2. (O) /SET/ The first six digits of a primary account number.
$ Basic Encoding Rules (BER)
(I) A standard for representing ASN.1 data types as strings of
octets. [X690] (See: Distinguished Encoding Rules.)
Deprecated Usage: Sometimes incorrectly treated as part of ASN.1.
However, ASN.1 properly refers only to a syntax description
language, and not to the encoding rules for the language.
$ Basic Security Option
(I) See: secondary definition under "IPSO".
$ bastion host
(I) A strongly protected computer that is in a network protected
by a firewall (or is part of a firewall) and is the only host (or
one of only a few) in the network that can be directly accessed
from networks on the other side of the firewall. (See: firewall.)
Tutorial: Filtering routers in a firewall typically restrict
traffic from the outside network to reaching just one host, the
bastion host, which usually is part of the firewall. Since only
this one host can be directly attacked, only this one host needs
to be very strongly protected, so security can be maintained more
easily and less expensively. However, to allow legitimate internal
and external users to access application resources through the
firewall, higher-layer protocols and services need to be relayed
and forwarded by the bastion host. Some services (e.g., DNS and
SMTP) have forwarding built in; other services (e.g., TELNET and
FTP) require a proxy server on the bastion host.
$ BBN Technologies Corp. (BBN)
(O) The research-and-development company (originally called Bolt
Baranek and Newman, Inc.) that built the ARPANET.
$ BCA
(O) See: brand certification authority.
Shirey Informational [Page 33]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ BCR
(O) See: BLACK/Crypto/RED.
$ BCI
(O) See: brand CRL identifier.
$ Bell-LaPadula model
(N) A formal, mathematical, state-transition model of
confidentiality policy for multilevel-secure computer systems
[Bell]. (Compare: Biba model, Brewer-Nash model.)
Tutorial: The model, devised by David Bell and Leonard LaPadula at
The MITRE Corporation in 1973, characterizes computer system
elements as subjects and objects. To determine whether or not a
subject is authorized for a particular access mode on an object,
the clearance of the subject is compared to the classification of
the object. The model defines the notion of a "secure state", in
which the only permitted access modes of subjects to objects are
in accordance with a specified security policy. It is proven that
each state transition preserves security by moving from secure
state to secure state, thereby proving that the system is secure.
In this model, a multilevel-secure system satisfies several rules,
including the "confinement property" (a.k.a. the "*-property"),
the "simple security property", and the "tranquility property".
$ benign
1. (N) /COMSEC/ "Condition of cryptographic data [such] that [the
data] cannot be compromised by human access [to the data]."
[C4009]
2. (O) /COMPUSEC/ See: secondary definition under "trust".
$ benign fill
(N) Process by which keying material is generated, distributed,
and placed into an ECU without exposure to any human or other
system entity, except the cryptographic module that consumes and
uses the material. (See: benign.)
$ BER
(I) See: Basic Encoding Rules.
$ beyond A1
1. (O) /formal/ A level of security assurance that is beyond the
highest level (level A1) of criteria specified by the TCSEC. (See:
Tutorial under "Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria".)
Shirey Informational [Page 34]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (O) /informal/ A level of trust so high that it is beyond
state-of-the-art technology; i.e., it cannot be provided or
verified by currently available assurance methods, and especially
not by currently available formal methods.
$ Biba integrity
(N) Synonym for "source integrity".
$ Biba model
(N) A formal, mathematical, state-transition model of integrity
policy for multilevel-secure computer systems [Biba]. (See: source
integrity. Compare: Bell-LaPadula model.)
Tutorial: This model for integrity control is analogous to the
Bell-LaPadula model for confidentiality control. Each subject and
object is assigned an integrity level and, to determine whether or
not a subject is authorized for a particular access mode on an
object, the integrity level of the subject is compared to that of
the object. The model prohibits the changing of information in an
object by a subject with a lesser or incomparable level. The rules
of the Biba model are duals of the corresponding rules in the
Bell-LaPadula model.
$ billet
(N) "A personnel position or assignment that may be filled by one
person." [JCP1] (Compare: principal, role, user.)
Tutorial: In an organization, a "billet" is a populational
position, of which there is exactly one instance; but a "role" is
functional position, of which there can be multiple instances.
System entities are in one-to-one relationships with their
billets, but may be in many-to-one and one-to-many relationships
with their roles.
$ BIN
(O) See: bank identification number.
$ bind
(I) To inseparably associate by applying some security mechanism.
Example: A CA creates a public-key certificate by using a digital
signature to bind together (a) a subject name, (b) a public key,
and usually (c) some additional data items (e.g., "X.509 public-
key certificate").
$ biometric authentication
(I) A method of generating authentication information for a person
by digitizing measurements of a physical or behavioral
Shirey Informational [Page 35]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
characteristic, such as a fingerprint, hand shape, retina pattern,
voiceprint, handwriting style, or face.
$ birthday attack
(I) A class of attacks against cryptographic functions, including
both encryption functions and hash functions. The attacks take
advantage of a statistical property: Given a cryptographic
function having an N-bit output, the probability is greater than
1/2 that for 2**(N/2) randomly chosen inputs, the function will
produce at least two outputs that are identical. (See: Tutorial
under "hash function".)
Derivation: From the somewhat surprising fact (often called the
"birthday paradox") that although there are 365 days in a year,
the probability is greater than 1/2 that two of more people share
the same birthday in any randomly chosen group of 23 people.
Birthday attacks enable an adversary to find two inputs for which
a cryptographic function produces the same cipher text (or find
two inputs for which a hash functions produces the same hash
result) much faster than a brute-force attack can; and a clever
adversary can use such a capability to create considerable
mischief. However, no birthday attack can enable an adversary to
decrypt a given cipher text (or find a hash input that results in
a given hash result) any faster than a brute-force attack can.
$ bit
(I) A contraction of the term "binary digit"; the smallest unit of
information storage, which has two possible states or values. The
values usually are represented by the symbols "0" (zero) and "1"
(one). (See: block, byte, nibble, word.)
$ bit string
(I) A sequence of bits, each of which is either "0" or "1".
$ BLACK
1. (N) Designation for data that consists only of cipher text, and
for information system equipment items or facilities that handle
only cipher text. Example: "BLACK key". (See: BCR, color change,
RED/BLACK separation. Compare: RED.)
2. (O) /U.S. Government/ "Designation applied to information
systems, and to associated areas, circuits, components, and
equipment, in which national security information is encrypted or
is not processed." [C4009]
3. (D) Any data that can be disclosed without harm.
Shirey Informational [Page 36]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the term with
definition 3 because the definition is ambiguous with regard to
whether or not the data is protected.
$ BLACK/Crypto/RED (BCR)
(N) An experimental, end-to-end, network packet encryption system
developed in a working prototype form by BBN and the Collins Radio
division of Rockwell Corporation in the 1975-1980 time frame for
the U.S. DoD. BCR was the first network security system to support
TCP/IP traffic, and it incorporated the first DES chips that were
validated by the U.S. National Bureau of Standards (now called
NIST). BCR also was the first to use a KDC and an ACC to manage
connections.
$ BLACK key
(N) A key that is protected with a key-encrypting key and that
must be decrypted before use. (See: BLACK. Compare: RED key.)
$ BLACKER
(O) An end-to-end encryption system for computer data networks
that was developed by the U.S. DoD in the 1980s to provide host-
to-host data confidentiality service for datagrams at OSIRM Layer
3. [Weis] (Compare: CANEWARE, IPsec.)
Tutorial: Each user host connects to its own bump-in-the-wire
encryption device called a BLACKER Front End (BFE, TSEC/KI-111),
through which the host connects to the subnetwork. The system also
includes two types of centralized devices: one or more KDCs
connect to the subnetwork and communicate with assigned sets of
BFEs, and one or more ACCs connect to the subnetwork and
communicate with assigned KDCs. BLACKER uses only symmetric
encryption. A KDC distributes session keys to BFE pairs as
authorized by an ACC. Each ACC maintains a database for a set of
BFEs, and the database determines which pairs from that set (i.e.,
which pairs of user hosts behind the BFEs) are authorized to
communicate and at what security levels.
The BLACKER system is MLS in three ways: (a) The BFEs form a
security perimeter around a subnetwork, separating user hosts from
the subnetwork, so that the subnetwork can operate at a different
security level (possibly a lower, less expensive level) than the
hosts. (b) The BLACKER components are trusted to separate
datagrams of different security levels, so that each datagram of a
given security level can be received only by a host that is
authorized for that security level; and thus BLACKER can separate
host communities that operate at different security levels. (c)
The host side of a BFE is itself MLS and can recognize a security
label on each packet, so that an MLS user host can be authorized
Shirey Informational [Page 37]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
to successively transmit datagrams that are labeled with different
security levels.
$ blind attack
(I) A type of network-based attack method that does not require
the attacking entity to receive data traffic from the attacked
entity; i.e., the attacker does not need to "see" data packets
sent by the victim. Example: SYN flood.
Tutorial: If an attack method is blind, the attacker's packets can
carry (a) a false IP source address (making it difficult for the
victim to find the attacker) and (b) a different address on every
packet (making it difficult for the victim to block the attack).
If the attacker needs to receive traffic from the victim, the
attacker must either (c) reveal its own IP address to the victim
(which enables the victim to find the attacker or block the attack
by filtering) or (d) provide a false address and also subvert
network routing mechanisms to divert the returning packets to the
attacker (which makes the attack more complex, more difficult, or
more expensive). [R3552]
$ block
(I) A bit string or bit vector of finite length. (See: bit, block
cipher. Compare: byte, word.)
Usage: An "N-bit block" contains N bits, which usually are
numbered from left to right as 1, 2, 3, ..., N.
$ block cipher
(I) An encryption algorithm that breaks plain text into fixed-size
segments and uses the same key to transform each plaintext segment
into a fixed-size segment of cipher text. Examples: AES, Blowfish,
DEA, IDEA, RC2, and SKIPJACK. (See: block, mode. Compare: stream
cipher.)
Tutorial: A block cipher can be adapted to have a different
external interface, such as that of a stream cipher, by using a
mode of cryptographic operation to package the basic algorithm.
(See: CBC, CCM, CFB, CMAC, CTR, DEA, ECB, OFB.)
$ Blowfish
(N) A symmetric block cipher with variable-length key (32 to 448
bits) designed in 1993 by Bruce Schneier as an unpatented,
license-free, royalty-free replacement for DES or IDEA. [Schn]
(See: Twofish.)
Shirey Informational [Page 38]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ brain-damaged
(D) /slang/ "Obviously wrong: extremely poorly designed. Calling
something brain-damaged is very extreme. The word implies that the
thing is completely unusable, and that its failure to work is due
to poor design, not accident." [NCSSG] (See: flaw.)
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ brand
1. (I) A distinctive mark or name that identifies a product or
business entity.
2. (O) /SET/ The name of a payment card. (See: BCA.)
Tutorial: Financial institutions and other companies have founded
payment card brands, protect and advertise the brands, establish
and enforce rules for use and acceptance of their payment cards,
and provide networks to interconnect the financial institutions.
These brands combine the roles of issuer and acquirer in
interactions with cardholders and merchants. [SET1]
$ brand certification authority (BCA)
(O) /SET/ A CA owned by a payment card brand, such as MasterCard,
Visa, or American Express. [SET2] (See: certification hierarchy,
SET.)
$ brand CRL identifier (BCI)
(O) /SET/ A digitally signed list, issued by a BCA, of the names
of CAs for which CRLs need to be processed when verifying
signatures in SET messages. [SET2]
$ break
(I) /cryptography/ To successfully perform cryptanalysis and thus
succeed in decrypting data or performing some other cryptographic
function, without initially having knowledge of the key that the
function requires. (See: penetrate, strength, work factor.)
Usage: This term applies to encrypted data or, more generally, to
a cryptographic algorithm or cryptographic system. Also, while the
most common use is to refer to completely breaking an algorithm,
the term is also used when a method is found that substantially
reduces the work factor.
Shirey Informational [Page 39]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Brewer-Nash model
(N) A security model [BN89] to enforce the Chinese wall policy.
(Compare: Bell-LaPadula model, Clark-Wilson model.)
Tutorial: All proprietary information in the set of commercial
firms F(1), F(2), ..., F(N) is categorized into mutually exclusive
conflict-of-interest classes I(1), I(2), ..., I(M) that apply
across all firms. Each firm belongs to exactly one class. The
Brewer-Nash model has the following mandatory rules:
- Brewer-Nash Read Rule: Subject S can read information object O
from firm F(i) only if either (a) O is from the same firm as
some object previously read by S *or* (b) O belongs to a class
I(i) from which S has not previously read any object. (See:
object, subject.)
- Brewer-Nash Write Rule: Subject S can write information object
O to firm F(i) only if (a) S can read O by the Brewer-Nash Read
Rule *and* (b) no object can be read by S from a different firm
F(j), no matter whether F(j) belongs to the same class as F(i)
or to a different class.
$ bridge
(I) A gateway for traffic flowing at OSIRM Layer 2 between two
networks (usually two LANs). (Compare: bridge CA, router.)
$ bridge CA
(I) A PKI consisting of only a CA that cross-certifies with CAs of
some other PKIs. (See: cross-certification. Compare: bridge.)
Tutorial: A bridge CA functions as a hub that enables a
certificate user in any of the PKIs that attach to the bridge, to
validate certificates issued in the other attached PKIs.
For example, a bridge CA (BCA) CA1
could cross-certify with four ^
PKIs that have the roots CA1, |
CA2, CA3, and CA4. The cross- v
certificates that the roots CA2 <-> BCA <-> CA3
exchange with the BCA enable an ^
end entity EE1 certified under |
under CA1 in PK1 to construct v
a certification path needed to CA4
validate the certificate of
end entity EE2 under CA2, CA1 -> BCA -> CA2 -> EE2
or vice versa. CA2 -> BCA -> CA1 -> EE1
Shirey Informational [Page 40]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ British Standard 7799
(N) Part 1 of the standard is a code of practice for how to secure
an information system. Part 2 specifies the management framework,
objectives, and control requirements for information security
management systems. [BS7799] (See: ISO 17799.)
$ browser
(I) A client computer program that can retrieve and display
information from servers on the World Wide Web. Examples: Netscape
Navigator and Microsoft Internet Explorer.
$ brute force
(I) A cryptanalysis technique or other kind of attack method
involving an exhaustive procedure that tries a large number of
possible solutions to the problem. (See: impossible, strength,
work factor.)
Tutorial: In some cases, brute force involves trying all of the
possibilities. For example, for cipher text where the analyst
already knows the decryption algorithm, a brute-force technique
for finding matching plain text is to decrypt the message with
every possible key. In other cases, brute force involves trying a
large number of possibilities but substantially fewer than all of
them. For example, given a hash function that produces an N-bit
hash result, the probability is greater than 1/2 that the analyst
will find two inputs that have the same hash result after trying
only 2**(N/2) randomly chosen inputs. (See: birthday attack.)
$ BS7799
(N) See: British Standard 7799.
$ buffer overflow
(I) Any attack technique that exploits a vulnerability resulting
from computer software or hardware that does not check for
exceeding the bounds of a storage area when data is written into a
sequence of storage locations beginning in that area.
Tutorial: By causing a normal system operation to write data
beyond the bounds of a storage area, the attacker seeks to either
disrupt system operation or cause the system to execute malicious
software inserted by the attacker.
$ buffer zone
(I) A neutral internetwork segment used to connect other segments
that each operate under a different security policy.
Shirey Informational [Page 41]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: To connect a private network to the Internet or some
other relatively public network, one could construct a small,
separate, isolated LAN and connect it to both the private network
and the public network; one or both of the connections would
implement a firewall to limit the traffic that could pass through
the buffer zone.
$ bulk encryption
1. (I) Encryption of multiple channels by aggregating them into a
single transfer path and then encrypting that path. (See:
channel.)
2. (O) "Simultaneous encryption of all channels of a multichannel
telecommunications link." [C4009] (Compare: bulk keying material.)
Usage: The use of "simultaneous" in definition 2 could be
interpreted to mean that multiple channels are encrypted
separately but at the same time. However, the common meaning of
the term is that multiple data flows are combined into a single
stream and then that stream is encrypted as a whole.
$ bulk key
(D) In a few published descriptions of hybrid encryption for SSH,
Windows 2000, and other applications, this term refers to a
symmetric key that (a) is used to encrypt a relatively large
amount of data and (b) is itself encrypted with a public key.
(Compare: bulk keying material, session key.)
Example: To send a large file to Bob, Alice (a) generates a
symmetric key and uses it to encrypt the file (i.e., encrypt the
bulk of the information that is to be sent) and then (b) encrypts
that symmetric key (the "bulk key") with Bob's public key.
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term or definition; the
term is not well-established and could be confused with the
established term "bulk keying material". Instead, use "symmetric
key" and carefully explain how the key is applied.
$ bulk keying material
(N) Refers to handling keying material in large quantities, e.g.,
as a dataset that contains many items of keying material. (See:
type 0. Compare: bulk key, bulk encryption.)
$ bump-in-the-stack
(I) An implementation approach that places a network security
mechanism inside the system that is to be protected. (Compare:
bump-in-the-wire.)
Shirey Informational [Page 42]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Example: IPsec can be implemented inboard, in the protocol stack
of an existing system or existing system design, by placing a new
layer between the existing IP layer and the OSIRM Layer 3 drivers.
Source code access for the existing stack is not required, but the
system that contains the stack does need to be modified [R4301].
$ bump-in-the-wire
(I) An implementation approach that places a network security
mechanism outside of the system that is to be protected. (Compare:
bump-in-the-stack.)
Example: IPsec can be implemented outboard, in a physically
separate device, so that the system that receives the IPsec
protection does not need to be modified at all [R4301]. Military-
grade link encryption has mainly been implemented as bump-in-the-
wire devices.
$ business-case analysis
(N) An extended form of cost-benefit analysis that considers
factors beyond financial metrics, including security factors such
as the requirement for security services, their technical and
programmatic feasibility, their qualitative benefits, and
associated risks. (See: risk analysis.)
$ byte
(I) A fundamental unit of computer storage; the smallest
addressable unit in a computer's architecture. Usually holds one
character of information and, today, usually means eight bits.
(Compare: octet.)
Usage: Understood to be larger than a "bit", but smaller than a
"word". Although "byte" almost always means "octet" today, some
computer architectures have had bytes in other sizes (e.g., six
bits, nine bits). Therefore, an STD SHOULD state the number of
bits in a byte where the term is first used in the STD.
$ C field
(D) See: Compartments field.
$ C1 or C2 computer system
(O) /TCSEC/ See: Tutorial under "Trusted Computer System
Evaluation Criteria".
$ CA
(I) See: certification authority.
Shirey Informational [Page 43]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ CA certificate
(D) "A [digital] certificate for one CA issued by another CA."
[X509]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the term with this
definition; the definition is ambiguous with regard to how the
certificate is constructed and how it is intended to be used.
IDOCs that use this term SHOULD provide a technical definition for
it. (See: certificate profile.)
Tutorial: There is no single, obvious choice for a technical
definition of this term. Different PKIs can use different
certificate profiles, and X.509 provides several choices of how to
issue certificates to CAs. For example, one possible definition is
the following: A v3 X.509 public-key certificate that has a
"basicConstraints" extension containing a "cA" value of "TRUE".
That would specifically indicate that "the certified public key
may be used to verify certificate signatures", i.e., that the
private key may be used by a CA.
However, there also are other ways to indicate such usage. The
certificate may have a "key Usage" extension that indicates the
purposes for which the public key may be used, and one of the
values that X.509 defines for that extension is "keyCertSign", to
indicate that the certificate may be used for verifying a CA's
signature on certificates. If "keyCertSign" is present in a
certificate that also has a "basicConstraints" extension, then
"cA" is set to "TRUE" in that extension. Alternatively, a CA could
be issued a certificate in which "keyCertSign" is asserted without
"basicConstraints" being present; and an entity that acts as a CA
could be issued a certificate with "keyUsage" set to other values,
either with or without "keyCertSign".
$ CA domain
(N) /PKI/ A security policy domain that "consists of a CA and its
subjects [i.e., the entities named in the certificates issued by
the CA]. Sometimes referred to as a PKI domain." [PAG] (See:
domain.)
$ Caesar cipher
(I) A cipher that is defined for an alphabet of N characters,
A(1), A(2), ..., A(N), and creates cipher text by replacing each
plaintext character A(i) by A(i+K, mod N) for some 0 one-to-many, <=> many-to-many.
+- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
| PKI System |
+ - - - - + | +------------------+ +-------------------------+ |
| User, | | |Subscriber, i.e., | | Identity of Subscriber | |
|i.e., one| | | Registered User, | | is system-unique | |
| of the | | | is system-unique | | +---------------------+ | |
|following| | | +--------------+ | | | Subscriber | | |
| | | | | User's core | | | | Identity's | | |
| +-----+ |===| | Registration | |==>| | Registration data | | |
| |human| | | | | data, i.e., | | | |+-------------------+| | |
| |being| | | | | an entity's | | | || same core data || | |
| +-----+ | | | |distinguishing|========|for all Identities || | |
| or | | | | attribute | | | || of the same User || | |
| +-----+ | | | | values | | +===|+-------------------+| | |
| |auto-| | | | +--------------+ | | | +---------------------+ | |
| |mated| | | +------------------+ | +------------|------------+ |
| |pro- | | | | +=======+ | |
| |cess | | | +-------v----|----------------------|------------+ |
| +-----+ | | | +----------v---+ +------------v----------+ | |
| or | | | |Authentication|<===>|Identifier of Identity | | |
|+-------+| | | | Information | | is system-unique | | |
|| a set || | | +--------------+ +-----------------------+ | |
|| of || | | Identifier Credential that associates unit of | |
|| either|| | | Authentication Information with the Identifier | |
|+-------+| | +------------------------------------------------+ |
+ - - - - + + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
$ identity-based security policy
(I) "A security policy based on the identities and/or attributes
of users, a group of users, or entities acting on behalf of the
users and the resources/objects being accessed." [I7498-2] (See:
rule-based security policy.)
Shirey Informational [Page 148]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ identity proofing
(I) A process that vets and verifies the information that is used
to establish the identity of a system entity. (See: registration.)
$ IDOC
(I) An abbreviation used in this Glossary to refer to a document
or other item of written material that is generated in the
Internet Standards Process (RFC 2026), i.e., an RFC, an Internet-
Draft, or some other item of discourse.
Deprecated Usage: This abbreviation SHOULD NOT be used in an IDOC
unless it is first defined in the IDOC because the abbreviation
was invented for this Glossary and is not widely known.
$ IDS
(I) See: intrusion detection system.
$ IEEE
(N) See: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
$ IEEE 802.10
(N) An IEEE committee developing security standards for LANs.
(See: SILS.)
$ IEEE P1363
(N) An IEEE working group, Standard for Public-Key Cryptography,
engaged in developing a comprehensive reference standard for
asymmetric cryptography. Covers discrete logarithm (e.g., DSA),
elliptic curve, and integer factorization (e.g., RSA); and covers
key agreement, digital signature, and encryption.
$ IESG
(I) See: Internet Engineering Steering Group.
$ IETF
(I) See: Internet Engineering Task Force.
$ IKE
(I) See: IPsec Key Exchange.
$ IMAP4
(I) See: Internet Message Access Protocol, version 4.
$ IMAP4 AUTHENTICATE
(I) An IMAP4 command (better described as a transaction type, or
subprotocol) by which an IMAP4 client optionally proposes a
mechanism to an IMAP4 server to authenticate the client to the
server and provide other security services. (See: POP3.)
Shirey Informational [Page 149]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: If the server accepts the proposal, the command is
followed by performing a challenge-response authentication
protocol and, optionally, negotiating a protection mechanism for
subsequent POP3 interactions. The security mechanisms that are
used by IMAP4 AUTHENTICATE -- including Kerberos, GSS-API, and
S/Key -- are described in [R1731].
$ impossible
(O) Cannot be done in any reasonable amount of time. (See: break,
brute force, strength, work factor.)
$ in the clear
(I) Not encrypted. (See: clear text.)
$ Ina Jo
(O) A methodology, language, and integrated set of software tools
developed at the System Development Corporation for specifying,
coding, and verifying software to produce correct and reliable
programs. Usage: a.k.a. the Formal Development Methodology. [Cheh]
$ incapacitation
(I) A type of threat action that prevents or interrupts system
operation by disabling a system component. (See: disruption.)
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- "Malicious logic": In context of incapacitation, any hardware,
firmware, or software (e.g., logic bomb) intentionally
introduced into a system to destroy system functions or
resources. (See: corruption, main entry for "malicious logic",
masquerade, misuse.)
- "Physical destruction": Deliberate destruction of a system
component to interrupt or prevent system operation.
- "Human error": /incapacitation/ Action or inaction that
unintentionally disables a system component. (See: corruption,
exposure.)
- "Hardware or software error": /incapacitation/ Error that
unintentionally causes failure of a system component and leads
to disruption of system operation. (See: corruption, exposure.)
- "Natural disaster": /incapacitation/ Any "act of God" (e.g.,
fire, flood, earthquake, lightning, or wind) that disables a
system component. [FP031 Section 2]
$ incident
See: security incident.
$ INCITS
(N) See: "International Committee for Information Technology
Standardization" under "ANSI".
Shirey Informational [Page 150]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ indicator
(N) An action -- either specific, generalized, or theoretical --
that an adversary might be expected to take in preparation for an
attack. [C4009] (See: "attack sensing, warning, and response".
Compare: message indicator.)
$ indirect attack
(I) See: secondary definition under "attack". Compare: direct
attack.
$ indirect certificate revocation list (ICRL)
(N) In X.509, a CRL that may contain certificate revocation
notifications for certificates issued by CAs other than the issuer
(i.e., signer) of the ICRL.
$ indistinguishability
(I) An attribute of an encryption algorithm that is a
formalization of the notion that the encryption of some string is
indistinguishable from the encryption of an equal-length string of
nonsense. (Compare: semantic security.)
$ inference
1. (I) A type of threat action that reasons from characteristics
or byproducts of communication and thereby indirectly accesses
sensitive data, but not necessarily the data contained in the
communication. (See: traffic analysis, signal analysis.)
2. (I) A type of threat action that indirectly gains unauthorized
access to sensitive information in a database management system by
correlating query responses with information that is already
known.
$ inference control
(I) Protection of data confidentiality against inference attack.
(See: traffic-flow confidentiality.)
Tutorial: A database management system containing N records about
individuals may be required to provide statistical summaries about
subsets of the population, while not revealing sensitive
information about a single individual. An attacker may try to
obtain sensitive information about an individual by isolating a
desired record at the intersection of a set of overlapping
queries. A system can attempt to prevent this by restricting the
size and overlap of query sets, distorting responses by rounding
or otherwise perturbing database values, and limiting queries to
random samples. However, these techniques may be impractical to
implement or use, and no technique is totally effective. For
example, restricting the minimum size of a query set -- that is,
Shirey Informational [Page 151]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
not responding to queries for which there are fewer than K or more
than N-K records that satisfy the query -- usually cannot prevent
unauthorized disclosure. An attacker can pad small query sets with
extra records, and then remove the effect of the extra records.
The formula for identifying the extra records is called the
"tracker". [Denns]
$ INFOCON
(O) See: information operations condition
$ informal
(N) Expressed in natural language. [CCIB] (Compare: formal,
semiformal.)
$ information
1. (I) Facts and ideas, which can be represented (encoded) as
various forms of data.
2. (I) Knowledge -- e.g., data, instructions -- in any medium or
form that can be communicated between system entities.
Tutorial: Internet security could be defined simply as protecting
information in the Internet. However, the perceived need to use
different protective measures for different types of information
(e.g., authentication information, classified information,
collateral information, national security information, personal
information, protocol control information, sensitive compartmented
information, sensitive information) has led to the diversity of
terminology listed in this Glossary.
$ information assurance
(N) /U.S. Government/ "Measures that protect and defend
information and information systems by ensuring their availability
integrity, authentication, confidentiality, and non-repudiation.
These measures include providing for restoration of information
systems by incorporating protection, detection, and reaction
capabilities." [C4009]
$ Information Assurance Technical Framework (IATF)
(O) A publicly available document [IATF], developed through a
collaborative effort by organizations in the U.S. Government and
industry, and issued by NSA. Intended for security managers and
system security engineers as a tutorial and reference document
about security problems in information systems and networks, to
improve awareness of tradeoffs among available technology
solutions and of desired characteristics of security approaches
for particular problems. (See: ISO 17799, [SP14].)
Shirey Informational [Page 152]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ information domain
(O) See: secondary definition under "domain".
$ information domain security policy
(O) See: secondary definition under "domain".
$ information flow policy
(N) /formal model/ A triple consisting of a set of security levels
(or their equivalent security labels), a binary operator that maps
each pair of security levels into a security level, and a binary
relation on the set that selects a set of pairs of levels such
that information is permitted to flow from an object of the first
level to an object of the second level. (See: flow control,
lattice model.)
$ information operations condition (INFOCON)
(O) /U.S. DoD/ A comprehensive defense posture and response based
on the status of information systems, military operations, and
intelligence assessments of adversary capabilities and intent.
(See: threat)
Derivation: From DEFCON, i.e., defense condition.
Tutorial: The U.S. DoD defines five INFOCON levels: NORMAL (normal
activity), ALPHA (increased risk of attack), BRAVO (specific risk
of attack), CHARLIE (limited attack), and DELTA (general attack).
$ information security (INFOSEC)
(N) Measures that implement and assure security services in
information systems, including in computer systems (see: COMPUSEC)
and in communication systems (see: COMSEC).
$ information system
(I) An organized assembly of computing and communication resources
and procedures -- i.e., equipment and services, together with
their supporting infrastructure, facilities, and personnel -- that
create, collect, record, process, store, transport, retrieve,
display, disseminate, control, or dispose of information to
accomplish a specified set of functions. (See: system entity,
system resource. Compare: computer platform.)
$ Information Technology Security Evaluation Criteria (ITSEC)
(N) A Standard [ITSEC] jointly developed by France, Germany, the
Netherlands, and the United Kingdom for use in the European Union;
accommodates a wider range of security assurance and functionality
combinations than the TCSEC. Superseded by the Common Criteria.
Shirey Informational [Page 153]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ INFOSEC
(I) See: information security.
$ ingress filtering
(I) A method [R2827] for countering attacks that use packets with
false IP source addresses, by blocking such packets at the
boundary between connected networks.
Tutorial: Suppose network A of an internet service provider (ISP)
includes a filtering router that is connected to customer network
B, and an attacker in B at IP source address "foo" attempts to
send packets with false source address "bar" into A. The false
address may be either fixed or randomly changing, and it may
either be unreachable or be a forged address that legitimately
exists within either B or some other network C. In ingress
filtering, the ISP's router blocks all inbound packet that arrive
from B with a source address that is not within the range of
legitimately advertised addresses for B. This method does not
prevent all attacks that can originate from B, but the actual
source of such attacks can be more easily traced because the
originating network is known.
$ initialization value (IV)
(I) /cryptography/ An input parameter that sets the starting state
of a cryptographic algorithm or mode. (Compare: activation data.)
Tutorial: An IV can be used to synchronize one cryptographic
process with another; e.g., CBC, CFB, and OFB use IVs. An IV also
can be used to introduce cryptographic variance (see: salt)
besides that provided by a key.
$ initialization vector
(D) /cryptography/ Synonym for "initialization value".
Deprecated Term: To avoid international misunderstanding, IDOCs
SHOULD NOT use this term in the context of cryptography because
most dictionary definitions of "vector" includes a concept of
direction or magnitude, which are irrelevant to cryptographic use.
$ insertion
1. (I) /packet/ See: secondary definition under "stream integrity
service".
2. (I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under
"falsification".
$ inside attack
(I) See: secondary definition under "attack". Compare: insider.
Shirey Informational [Page 154]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ insider
1. (I) A user (usually a person) that accesses a system from a
position that is inside the system's security perimeter. (Compare:
authorized user, outsider, unauthorized user.)
Tutorial: An insider has been assigned a role that has more
privileges to access system resources than do some other types of
users, or can access those resources without being constrained by
some access controls that are applied to outside users. For
example, a salesclerk is an insider who has access to the cash
register, but a store customer is an outsider.
The actions performed by an insider in accessing the system may be
either authorized or unauthorized; i.e., an insider may act either
as an authorized user or as an unauthorized user.
2. (O) A person with authorized physical access to the system.
Example: In this sense, an office janitor is an insider, but a
burglar or casual visitor is not. [NRC98]
3. (O) A person with an organizational status that causes the
system or members of the organization to view access requests as
being authorized. Example: In this sense, a purchasing agent is an
insider but a vendor is not. [NRC98]
$ inspectable space
(O) /EMSEC/ "Three-dimensional space surrounding equipment that
process classified and/or sensitive information within which
TEMPEST exploitation is not considered practical or where legal
authority to identify and/or remove a potential TEMPEST
exploitation exists." [C4009] (Compare: control zone, TEMPEST
zone.)
$ Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
(N) The IEEE is a not-for-profit association of approximately
300,000 individual members in 150 countries. The IEEE produces
nearly one third of the world's published literature in electrical
engineering, computers, and control technology; holds hundreds of
major, annual conferences; and maintains more than 800 active
standards, with many more under development. (See: SILS.)
$ integrity
See: data integrity, datagram integrity service, correctness
integrity, source integrity, stream integrity service, system
integrity.
Shirey Informational [Page 155]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ integrity check
(D) A computation that is part of a mechanism to provide data
integrity service or data origin authentication service. (Compare:
checksum.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"cryptographic hash" or "protected checksum". This term
unnecessarily duplicates the meaning of other, well-established
terms; this term only mentions integrity, even though the intended
service may be data origin authentication; and not every checksum
is cryptographically protected.
$ integrity label
(I) A security label that tells the degree of confidence that may
be placed in the data, and may also tell what countermeasures are
required to be applied to protect the data from alteration and
destruction. (See: integrity. Compare: classification label.)
$ intelligent threat
(I) A circumstance in which an adversary has the technical and
operational ability to detect and exploit a vulnerability and also
has the demonstrated, presumed, or inferred intent to do so. (See:
threat.)
$ interception
(I) A type of threat action whereby an unauthorized entity
directly accesses sensitive data while the data is traveling
between authorized sources and destinations. (See: unauthorized
disclosure.)
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- "Theft": Gaining access to sensitive data by stealing a
shipment of a physical medium, such as a magnetic tape or disk,
that holds the data.
- "Wiretapping (passive)": Monitoring and recording data that is
flowing between two points in a communication system. (See:
wiretapping.)
- "Emanations analysis": Gaining direct knowledge of communicated
data by monitoring and resolving a signal that is emitted by a
system and that contains the data but was not intended to
communicate the data. (See: emanation.)
$ interference
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "obstruction".
$ intermediate CA
(D) The CA that issues a cross-certificate to another CA. [X509]
(See: cross-certification.)
Shirey Informational [Page 156]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because it is not
widely known and mixes concepts in a potentially misleading way.
For example, suppose that end entity 1 ("EE1) is in one PKI
("PKI1"), end entity 2 ("EE2) is in another PKI ("PKI2"), and the
root in PKI1 ("CA1") cross-certifies the root CA in PKI2 ("CA2").
Then, if EE1 constructs the certification path CA1-to-CA2-to-EE2
to validate a certificate of EE2, conventional English usage would
describe CA2 as being in the "intermediate" position in that path,
not CA1.
$ internal controls
(I) /COMPUSEC/ Functions, features, and technical characteristics
of computer hardware and software, especially of operating
systems. Includes mechanisms to regulate the operation of a
computer system with regard to access control, flow control, and
inference control. (Compare: external controls.)
$ International Data Encryption Algorithm (IDEA)
(N) A patented, symmetric block cipher that uses a 128-bit key and
operates on 64-bit blocks. [Schn] (See: symmetric cryptography.)
$ International Standard
(N) See: secondary definition under "ISO".
$ International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
(O) Rules issued by the U.S. State Department, by authority of the
Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778), to control export and
import of defense articles and defense services, including
information security systems, such as cryptographic systems, and
TEMPEST suppression technology. (See: type 1 product, Wassenaar
Arrangement.)
$ internet, Internet
1. (I) /not capitalized/ Abbreviation of "internetwork".
2. (I) /capitalized/ The Internet is the single, interconnected,
worldwide system of commercial, governmental, educational, and
other computer networks that share (a) the protocol suite
specified by the IAB (RFC 2026) and (b) the name and address
spaces managed by the ICANN. (See: Internet Layer, Internet
Protocol Suite.)
Usage: Use with definite article ("the") when using as a noun. For
example, say "My LAN is small, but the Internet is large." Don't
say "My LAN is small, but Internet is large."
Shirey Informational [Page 157]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Internet Architecture Board (IAB)
(I) A technical advisory group of the ISOC, chartered by the ISOC
Trustees to provide oversight of Internet architecture and
protocols and, in the context of Internet Standards, a body to
which decisions of the IESG may be appealed. Responsible for
approving appointments to the IESG from among nominees submitted
by the IETF nominating committee. (RFC 2026)
$ Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
(I) From the early days of the Internet, the IANA was chartered by
the ISOC and the U.S. Government's Federal Network Council to be
the central coordination, allocation, and registration body for
parameters for Internet protocols. Superseded by ICANN.
$ Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP)
(I) An Internet Standard protocol (RFC 792) that is used to report
error conditions during IP datagram processing and to exchange
other information concerning the state of the IP network.
$ Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
(I) The non-profit, private corporation that has assumed
responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol
parameter assignment, DNS management, and root server system
management functions formerly performed under U.S. Government
contract by IANA and other entities.
Tutorial: The IPS, as defined by the IETF and the IESG, contains
numerous parameters, such as Internet addresses, domain names,
autonomous system numbers, protocol numbers, port numbers,
management information base OIDs, including private enterprise
numbers, and many others. The Internet community requires that the
values used in these parameter fields be assigned uniquely. ICANN
makes those assignments as requested and maintains a registry of
the current values.
ICANN was formed in October 1998, by a coalition of the Internet's
business, technical, and academic communities. The U.S. Government
designated ICANN to serve as the global consensus entity with
responsibility for coordinating four key functions for the
Internet: allocation of IP address space, assignment of protocol
parameters, management of the DNS, and management of the DNS root
server system.
$ Internet-Draft
(I) A working document of the IETF, its areas, and its working
groups. (RFC 2026) (Compare: RFC.)
Shirey Informational [Page 158]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: The term is customarily hyphenated when used either as a
adjective or a noun, even though the latter is not standard
English punctuation.
Tutorial: An Internet-Draft is not an archival document like an
RFC is. Instead, an Internet-Draft is a preliminary or working
document that is valid for a maximum of six months and may be
updated, replaced, or made obsolete by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use an Internet-Draft as reference
material or to cite it other than as a "work in progress".
Although most of the Internet-Drafts are produced by the IETF, any
interested organization may request to have its working documents
published as Internet-Drafts.
$ Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG)
(I) The part of the ISOC responsible for technical management of
IETF activities and administration of the Internet Standards
Process according to procedures approved by the ISOC Trustees.
Directly responsible for actions along the "standards track",
including final approval of specifications as Internet Standards.
Composed of IETF Area Directors and the IETF chairperson, who also
chairs the IESG. (RFC 2026)
$ Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
(I) A self-organized group of people who make contributions to the
development of Internet technology. The principal body engaged in
developing Internet Standards, although not itself a part of the
ISOC. Composed of Working Groups, which are arranged into Areas
(such as the Security Area), each coordinated by one or more Area
Directors. Nominations to the IAB and the IESG are made by a
committee selected at random from regular IETF meeting attendees
who have volunteered. (RFCs 2026, 3935) [R2323]
$ Internet Key Exchange (IKE)
(I) An Internet, IPsec, key-establishment protocol [R4306] for
putting in place authenticated keying material (a) for use with
ISAKMP and (b) for other security associations, such as in AH and
ESP.
Tutorial: IKE is based on three earlier protocol designs: ISAKMP,
OAKLEY, and SKEME.
$ Internet Layer
(I) See: Internet Protocol Suite.
$ Internet Message Access Protocol, version 4 (IMAP4)
(I) An Internet protocol (RFC 2060) by which a client workstation
can dynamically access a mailbox on a server host to manipulate
Shirey Informational [Page 159]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
and retrieve mail messages that the server has received and is
holding for the client. (See: POP3.)
Tutorial: IMAP4 has mechanisms for optionally authenticating a
client to a server and providing other security services. (See:
IMAP4 AUTHENTICATE.)
$ Internet Open Trading Protocol (IOTP)
(I) An Internet protocol [R2801] proposed as a general framework
for Internet commerce, able to encapsulate transactions of various
proprietary payment systems (e.g., GeldKarte, Mondex, SET, Visa
Cash). Provides optional security services by incorporating
various Internet security mechanisms (e.g., MD5) and protocols
(e.g., TLS).
$ Internet Policy Registration Authority (IPRA)
(I) An X.509-compliant CA that is the top CA of the Internet
certification hierarchy operated under the auspices of the ISOC
[R1422]. (See: /PEM/ under "certification hierarchy".)
$ Internet Private Line Interface (IPLI)
(O) A successor to the PLI, updated to use TCP/IP and newer
military-grade COMSEC equipment (TSEC/KG-84). The IPLI was a
portable, modular system that was developed for use in tactical,
packet-radio networks. (See: end-to-end encryption.)
$ Internet Protocol (IP)
(I) An Internet Standard, Internet-Layer protocol that moves
datagrams (discrete sets of bits) from one computer to another
across an internetwork but does not provide reliable delivery,
flow control, sequencing, or other end-to-end services that TCP
provides. IP version 4 (IPv4) is specified in RFC 791, and IP
version 6 (IPv6) is specified in RFC 2460. (See: IP address,
TCP/IP.)
Tutorial: If IP were used in an OSIRM stack, IP would be placed at
the top of Layer 3, above other Layer 3 protocols in the stack.
In any IPS stack, IP is always present in the Internet Layer and
is always placed at the top of that layer, on top of any other
protocols that are used in that layer. In some sense, IP is the
only protocol specified for the IPS Internet Layer; other
protocols used there, such as AH and ESP, are just IP variations.
$ Internet Protocol security
See: IP Security Protocol.
Shirey Informational [Page 160]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Internet Protocol Security Option (IPSO)
(I) Refers to one of three types of IP security options, which are
fields that may be added to an IP datagram for carrying security
information about the datagram. (Compare: IPsec.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term without a
modifier to indicate which of the following three types is meant:
- "DoD Basic Security Option" (IP option type 130): Defined for
use on U.S. DoD common-use data networks. Identifies the DoD
classification level at which the datagram is to be protected
and the protection authorities whose rules apply to the
datagram. (A "protection authority" is a National Access
Program (e.g., GENSER, SIOP-ESI, SCI, NSA, Department of
Energy) or Special Access Program that specifies protection
rules for transmission and processing of the information
contained in the datagram.) [R1108]
- "DoD Extended Security Option" (IP option type 133): Permits
additional security labeling information, beyond that present
in the Basic Security Option, to be supplied in the datagram to
meet the needs of registered authorities. [R1108]
- "Common IP Security Option" (CIPSO) (IP option type 134):
Designed by TSIG to carry hierarchic and non-hierarchic
security labels. (Formerly called "Commercial IP Security
Option"; a version 2.3 draft was published 9 March 1993 as an
Internet-Draft but did not advance to RFC form.) [CIPSO]
$ Internet Protocol Suite (IPS)
(I) The set of network communication protocols that are specified
by the IETF, and approved as Internet Standards by the IESG,
within the oversight of the IAB. (See: OSIRM Security
Architecture. Compare: OSIRM.)
Usage: This set of protocols is popularly known as "TCP/IP"
because TCP and IP are its most basic and important components.
For clarity, this Glossary refers to IPS protocol layers by name
and capitalizes those names, and refers to OSIRM protocol layers
by number.
Tutorial: The IPS does have architectural principles [R1958], but
there is no Internet Standard that defines a layered IPS reference
model like the OSIRM. Still, Internet community literature has
referred (inconsistently) to IPS layers since early in the
Internet's development [Padl].
Shirey Informational [Page 161]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
This Glossary treats the IPS as having five protocol layers --
Application, Transport, Internet, Network Interface, and Network
Hardware (or Network Substrate) -- which are illustrated in the
following diagram:
OSIRM Layers Examples IPS Layers Examples
------------------ --------------- --------------- --------------
Message Format: P2 [X420] Message Format: ARPA (RFC 822)
+----------------+ +-------------+
|7.Application | P1 [X419] | Application | SMTP (RFC 821)
+----------------+ - - - - - - | |
|6.Presentation | [I8823] | |
+----------------+ - - - - - - | |
|5.Session | [I8327] +-------------+
+----------------+ - - - - - - | Transport | TCP (RFC 793)
|4.Transport | TP4 [I8073] | |
+----------------+ - - - - - - +-------------+
|3.Network | CLNP [I8473] | Internet | IP (RFC 791)
| | +-------------+
| | | Network | IP over IEEE
+----------------+ - - - - - - | Interface | 802 (RFC 1042)
|2.Data Link | +-------------+
| | LLC [I8802-2] - Network - The IPS does
| | MAC [I8802-3] - Hardware - not include
+----------------+ - (or Network - standards for
|1.Physical | Baseband - Substrate) - this layer.
+----------------+ Signaling [Stal] + - - - - - - +
The diagram approximates how the five IPS layers align with the
seven OSIRM layers, and it offers examples of protocol stacks that
provide roughly equivalent electronic mail service over a private
LAN that uses baseband signaling.
- IPS Application Layer: The user runs an application program.
The program selects the data transport service it needs --
either a sequence of data messages or a continuous stream of
data -- and hands application data to the Transport Layer for
delivery.
- IPS Transport Layer: This layer divides application data into
packets, adds a destination address to each, and communicates
them end-to-end -- from one application program to another --
optionally regulating the flow and ensuring reliable (error-
free and sequenced) delivery.
- IPS Internet Layer: This layer carries transport packets in IP
datagrams. It moves each datagram independently, from its
source computer to its addressed destination computer, routing
Shirey Informational [Page 162]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
the datagram through a sequence of networks and relays and
selecting appropriate network interfaces en route.
- IPS Network Interface Layer: This layer accepts datagrams for
transmission over a specific network. This layer specifies
interface conventions for carrying IP over OSIRM Layer 3
protocols and over Media Access Control sublayer protocols of
OSIRM Layer 2. An example is IP over IEEE 802 (RFD 1042).
- IPS Network Hardware Layer: This layer consists of specific,
physical communication media. However, the IPS does not specify
its own peer-to-peer protocols in this layer. Instead, the
layering conventions specified by the Network Interface Layer
use Layer 2 and Layer 3 protocols that are specified by bodies
other than the IETF. That is, the IPS addresses *inter*-network
functions and does not address *intra*-network functions.
The two models are most dissimilar in the upper layers, where the
IPS model does not include Session and Presentation layers.
However, this omission causes fewer functional differences between
the models than might be imagined, and the differences have
relatively few security implications:
- Formal separation of OSIRM Layers 5, 6, and 7 is not needed in
implementations; the functions of these layers sometimes are
mixed in a single software unit, even in protocols in the OSI
suite.
- Some OSIRM Layer 5 services -- for example, connection
termination -- are built into TCP, and the remaining Layer 5
and 6 functions are built into IPS Application-Layer protocols
where needed.
- The OSIRM does not place any security services in Layer 5 (see:
OSIRM Security Architecture).
- The lack of an explicit Presentation Layer in the IPS sometimes
makes it simpler to implement security in IPS applications. For
example, a primary function of Layer 6 is to convert data
between internal and external forms, using a transfer syntax to
unambiguously encode data for transmission. If an OSIRM
application encrypts data to protect against disclosure during
transmission, the transfer encoding must be done before the
encryption. If an application does encryption, as is done in
OSI message handling and directory service protocols, then
Layer 6 functions must be replicated in Layer 7. [X400, X500].
Shirey Informational [Page 163]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
The two models are most alike at the top of OSIRM Layer 3, where
the OSI Connectionless Network Layer Protocol (CLNP) and the IPS
IP are quite similar. Connection-oriented security services
offered in OSIRM Layer 3 are inapplicable in the IPS, because the
IPS Internet Layer lacks the explicit, connection-oriented service
offered in the OSIRM.
$ Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol (ISAKMP)
(I) An Internet IPsec protocol [R2408] to negotiate, establish,
modify, and delete security associations, and to exchange key
generation and authentication data, independent of the details of
any specific key generation technique, key establishment protocol,
encryption algorithm, or authentication mechanism.
Tutorial: ISAKMP supports negotiation of security associations for
protocols at all IPS layers. By centralizing management of
security associations, ISAKMP reduces duplicated functionality
within each protocol. ISAKMP can also reduce connection setup
time, by negotiating a whole stack of services at once. Strong
authentication is required on ISAKMP exchanges, and a digital
signature algorithm based on asymmetric cryptography is used
within ISAKMP's authentication component.
ISAKMP negotiations are conducted in two "phases":
- "Phase 1 negotiation". A phase 1 negotiation establishes a
security association to be used by ISAKMP to protect its own
protocol operations.
- "Phase 2 negotiation". A phase 2 negotiation (which is
protected by a security association that was established by a
phase 1 negotiation) establishes a security association to be
used to protect the operations of a protocol other than ISAKMP,
such as ESP.
$ Internet Society (ISOC)
(I) A professional society concerned with Internet development
(including technical Internet Standards); with how the Internet is
and can be used; and with social, political, and technical issues
that result. The ISOC Board of Trustees approves appointments to
the IAB from among nominees submitted by the IETF nominating
committee. (RFC 2026)
$ Internet Standard
(I) A specification, approved by the IESG and published as an RFC,
that is stable and well-understood, is technically competent, has
multiple, independent, and interoperable implementations with
substantial operational experience, enjoys significant public
support, and is recognizably useful in some or all parts of the
Internet. (RFC 2026) (Compare: RFC.)
Shirey Informational [Page 164]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: The "Internet Standards Process" is an activity of the
ISOC and is organized and managed by the IAB and the IESG. The
process is concerned with all protocols, procedures, and
conventions used in or by the Internet, whether or not they are
part of the IPS. The "Internet Standards Track" has three levels
of increasing maturity: Proposed Standard, Draft Standard, and
Standard. (Compare: ISO, W3C.)
$ internetwork
(I) A system of interconnected networks; a network of networks.
Usually shortened to "internet". (See: internet, Internet.)
Tutorial: An internet can be built using OSIRM Layer 3 gateways to
implement connections between a set of similar subnetworks. With
dissimilar subnetworks, i.e., subnetworks that differ in the Layer
3 protocol service they offer, an internet can be built by
implementing a uniform internetwork protocol (e.g., IP) that
operates at the top of Layer 3 and hides the underlying
subnetworks' heterogeneity from hosts that use communication
services provided by the internet. (See: router.)
$ intranet
(I) A computer network, especially one based on Internet
technology, that an organization uses for its own internal (and
usually private) purposes and that is closed to outsiders. (See:
extranet, VPN.)
$ intruder
(I) An entity that gains or attempts to gain access to a system or
system resource without having authorization to do so. (See:
intrusion. Compare: adversary, cracker, hacker.)
$ intrusion
1. (I) A security event, or a combination of multiple security
events, that constitutes a security incident in which an intruder
gains, or attempts to gain, access to a system or system resource
without having authorization to do so. (See: IDS.)
2. (I) A type of threat action whereby an unauthorized entity
gains access to sensitive data by circumventing a system's
security protections. (See: unauthorized disclosure.)
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- "Trespass": Gaining physical access to sensitive data by
circumventing a system's protections.
- "Penetration": Gaining logical access to sensitive data by
circumventing a system's protections.
Shirey Informational [Page 165]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- "Reverse engineering": Acquiring sensitive data by
disassembling and analyzing the design of a system component.
- "Cryptanalysis": Transforming encrypted data into plain text
without having prior knowledge of encryption parameters or
processes. (See: main entry for "cryptanalysis".)
$ intrusion detection
(I) Sensing and analyzing system events for the purpose of
noticing (i.e., becoming aware of) attempts to access system
resources in an unauthorized manner. (See: anomaly detection, IDS,
misuse detection. Compare: extrusion detection.) [IDSAN, IDSSC,
IDSSE, IDSSY]
Usage: This includes the following subtypes:
- "Active detection": Real-time or near-real-time analysis of
system event data to detect current intrusions, which result in
an immediate protective response.
- "Passive detection": Off-line analysis of audit data to detect
past intrusions, which are reported to the system security
officer for corrective action. (Compare: security audit.)
$ intrusion detection system (IDS)
1. (N) A process or subsystem, implemented in software or
hardware, that automates the tasks of (a) monitoring events that
occur in a computer network and (b) analyzing them for signs of
security problems. [SP31] (See: intrusion detection.)
2. (N) A security alarm system to detect unauthorized entry.
[DC6/9].
Tutorial: Active intrusion detection processes can be either host-
based or network-based:
- "Host-based": Intrusion detection components -- traffic sensors
and analyzers -- run directly on the hosts that they are
intended to protect.
- "Network-based": Sensors are placed on subnetwork components,
and analysis components run either on subnetwork components or
hosts.
$ invalidity date
(N) An X.509 CRL entry extension that "indicates the date at which
it is known or suspected that the [revoked certificate's private
key] was compromised or that the certificate should otherwise be
considered invalid." [X509].
Tutorial: This date may be earlier than the revocation date in the
CRL entry, and may even be earlier than the date of issue of
earlier CRLs. However, the invalidity date is not, by itself,
Shirey Informational [Page 166]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
sufficient for purposes of non-repudiation service. For example,
to fraudulently repudiate a validly generated signature, a private
key holder may falsely claim that the key was compromised at some
time in the past.
$ IOTP
(I) See: Internet Open Trading Protocol.
$ IP
(I) See: Internet Protocol.
$ IP address
(I) A computer's internetwork address that is assigned for use by
IP and other protocols.
Tutorial: An IP version 4 address (RFC 791) has four 8-bit parts
and is written as a series of four decimal numbers separated by
periods. Example: The address of the host named "rosslyn.bbn.com"
is 192.1.7.10.
An IP version 6 address (RFC 2373) has eight 16-bit parts and is
written as eight hexadecimal numbers separated by colons.
Examples: 1080:0:0:0:8:800:200C:417A and
FEDC:BA98:7654:3210:FEDC:BA98:7654:3210.
$ IP Security Option
(I) See: Internet Protocol Security Option.
$ IP Security Protocol (IPsec)
1a. (I) The name of the IETF working group that is specifying an
architecture [R2401, R4301] and set of protocols to provide
security services for IP traffic. (See: AH, ESP, IKE, SAD, SPD.
Compare: IPSO.)
1b. (I) A collective name for the IP security architecture [R4301]
and associated set of protocols (primarily AH, ESP, and IKE).
Usage: In IDOCs that use the abbreviation "IPsec", the letters
"IP" SHOULD be in uppercase, and the letters "sec" SHOULD NOT.
Tutorial: The security services provided by IPsec include access
control service, connectionless data integrity service, data
origin authentication service, protection against replays
(detection of the arrival of duplicate datagrams, within a
constrained window), data confidentiality service, and limited
traffic-flow confidentiality. IPsec specifies (a) security
protocols (AH and ESP), (b) security associations (what they are,
how they work, how they are managed, and associated processing),
Shirey Informational [Page 167]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
(c) key management (IKE), and (d) algorithms for authentication
and encryption. Implementation of IPsec is optional for IP version
4, but mandatory for IP version 6. (See: transport mode, tunnel
mode.)
$ IPLI
(I) See: Internet Private Line Interface.
$ IPRA
(I) See: Internet Policy Registration Authority.
$ IPS
(I) See: Internet Protocol Suite.
$ IPsec
(I) See: IP Security Protocol.
$ IPSO
(I) See: Internet Protocol Security Option.
$ ISAKMP
(I) See: Internet Security Association and Key Management
Protocol.
$ ISO
(I) International Organization for Standardization, a voluntary,
non-treaty, non-governmental organization, established in 1947,
with voting members that are designated standards bodies of
participating nations and non-voting observer organizations.
(Compare: ANSI, IETF, ITU-T, W3C.)
Tutorial: Legally, ISO is a Swiss, non-profit, private
organization. ISO and the IEC (the International Electrotechnical
Commission) form the specialized system for worldwide
standardization. National bodies that are members of ISO or IEC
participate in developing international standards through ISO and
IEC technical committees that deal with particular fields of
activity. Other international governmental and non-governmental
organizations, in liaison with ISO and IEC, also take part. (ANSI
is the U.S. voting member of ISO. ISO is a class D member of ITU-
T.)
The ISO standards development process has four levels of
increasing maturity: Working Draft (WD), Committee Draft (CD),
Draft International Standard (DIS), and International Standard
(IS). (Compare: "Internet Standards Track" under "Internet
Standard".) In information technology, ISO and IEC have a joint
technical committee, ISO/IEC JTC 1. DISs adopted by JTC 1 are
Shirey Informational [Page 168]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
circulated to national bodies for voting, and publication as an IS
requires approval by at least 75% of the national bodies casting a
vote.
$ ISO 17799
(N) An International Standard that is a code of practice, derived
from Part 1 of British Standard 7799, for managing the security of
information systems in an organization. This standard does not
provide definitive or specific material on any security topic. It
provides general guidance on a wide variety of topics, but
typically does not go into depth. (See: IATF, [SP14].)
$ ISOC
(I) See: Internet Society.
$ issue
(I) /PKI/ Generate and sign a digital certificate (or a CRL) and,
usually, distribute it and make it available to potential
certificate users (or CRL users). (See: certificate creation.)
Usage: The term "issuing" is usually understood to refer not only
to creating a digital certificate (or a CRL) but also to making it
available to potential users, such as by storing it in a
repository or other directory or otherwise publishing it. However,
the ABA [DSG] explicitly limits this term to the creation process
and excludes any related publishing or distribution process.
$ issuer
1. (I) /certificate, CRL/ The CA that signs a digital certificate
or CRL.
Tutorial: An X.509 certificate always includes the issuer's name.
The name may include a common name value.
2. (O) /payment card, SET/ "The financial institution or its agent
that issues the unique primary account number to the cardholder
for the payment card brand." [SET2]
Tutorial: The institution that establishes the account for a
cardholder and issues the payment card also guarantees payment for
authorized transactions that use the card in accordance with card
brand regulations and local legislation. [SET1]
$ ITAR
(O) See: International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
$ ITSEC
(N) See: Information Technology System Evaluation Criteria.
Shirey Informational [Page 169]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ ITU-T
(N) International Telecommunications Union, Telecommunication
Standardization Sector (formerly "CCITT"), a United Nations treaty
organization that is composed mainly of postal, telephone, and
telegraph authorities of the member countries and that publishes
standards called "Recommendations". (See: X.400, X.500.)
Tutorial: The Department of State represents the United States.
ITU-T works on many kinds of communication systems. ITU-T
cooperates with ISO on communication protocol standards, and many
Recommendations in that area are also published as an ISO standard
with an ISO name and number.
$ IV
(I) See: initialization value.
$ jamming
(N) An attack that attempts to interfere with the reception of
broadcast communications. (See: anti-jam, denial of service.
Compare: flooding.)
Tutorial: Jamming uses "interference" as a type of "obstruction"
intended to cause "disruption". Jamming a broadcast signal is
typically done by broadcasting a second signal that receivers
cannot separate from the first one. Jamming is mainly thought of
in the context of wireless communication, but also can be done in
some wired technologies, such as LANs that use contention
techniques to share a broadcast medium.
$ KAK
(D) See: key-auto-key. (Compare: KEK.)
$ KDC
(I) See: Key Distribution Center.
$ KEA
(N) See: Key Exchange Algorithm.
$ KEK
(I) See: key-encrypting key. (Compare: KAK.)
$ Kerberos
(I) A system developed at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology that depends on passwords and symmetric cryptography
(DES) to implement ticket-based, peer entity authentication
service and access control service distributed in a client-server
network environment. [R4120, Stei] (See: realm.)
Shirey Informational [Page 170]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Kerberos was originally developed by Project Athena and
is named for the mythical three-headed dog that guards Hades. The
system architecture includes authentication servers and ticket-
granting servers that function as an ACC and a KDC.
RFC 4556 describes extensions to the Kerberos specification that
modify the initial authentication exchange between a client and
the KDC. The extensions employ public-key cryptography to enable
the client and KDC to mutually authenticate and establish shared,
symmetric keys that are used to complete the exchange. (See:
PKINIT.)
$ kernel
(I) A small, trusted part of a system that provides services on
which the other parts of the system depend. (See: security
kernel.)
$ Kernelized Secure Operating System (KSOS)
(O) An MLS computer operating system, designed to be a provably
secure replacement for UNIX Version 6, and consisting of a
security kernel, non-kernel security-related utility programs, and
optional UNIX application development and support environments.
[Perr]
Tutorial: KSOS-6 was the implementation on a SCOMP. KSOS-11 was
the implementation by Ford Aerospace and Communications
Corporation on the DEC PDP-11/45 and PDP-11/70 computers.
$ key
1a. (I) /cryptography/ An input parameter used to vary a
transformation function performed by a cryptographic algorithm.
(See: private key, public key, storage key, symmetric key, traffic
key. Compare: initialization value.)
1b. (O) /cryptography/ Used in singular form as a collective noun
referring to keys or keying material. Example: A fill device can
be used transfer key between two cryptographic devices.
2. (I) /anti-jam/ An input parameter used to vary a process that
determines patterns for an anti-jam measure. (See: frequency
hopping, spread spectrum.)
Tutorial: A key is usually specified as a sequence of bits or
other symbols. If a key value needs to be kept secret, the
sequence of symbols that comprise it should be random, or at least
pseudorandom, because that makes the key harder for an adversary
to guess. (See: brute-force attack, cryptanalysis, strength.)
Shirey Informational [Page 171]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ key agreement (algorithm or protocol)
1. (I) A key establishment method (especially one involving
asymmetric cryptography) by which two or more entities, without
prior arrangement except a public exchange of data (such as public
keys), each can generate the same key value. That is, the method
does not send a secret from one entity to the other; instead, both
entities, without prior arrangement except a public exchange of
data, can compute the same secret value, but that value cannot be
computed by other, unauthorized entities. (See: Diffie-Hellman-
Merkle, key establishment, KEA, MQV. Compare: key transport.)
2. (O) "A method for negotiating a key value on line without
transferring the key, even in an encrypted form, e.g., the Diffie-
Hellman technique." [X509] (See: Diffie-Hellman-Merkle.)
3. (O) "The procedure whereby two different parties generate
shared symmetric keys such that any of the shared symmetric keys
is a function of the information contributed by all legitimate
participants, so that no party [alone] can predetermine the value
of the key." [A9042]
Example: A message originator and the intended recipient can each
use their own private key and the other's public key with the
Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm to first compute a shared secret
value and, from that value, derive a session key to encrypt the
message.
$ key authentication
(N) "The assurance of the legitimate participants in a key
agreement [i.e., in a key-agreement protocol] that no non-
legitimate party possesses the shared symmetric key." [A9042]
$ key-auto-key (KAK)
(D) "Cryptographic logic [i.e., a mode of operation] using
previous key to produce key." [C4009, A1523] (See: CTAK,
/cryptographic operation/ under "mode".)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is neither
well-known nor precisely defined. Instead, use terms associated
with modes that are defined in standards, such as CBC, CFB, and
OFB.
$ key center
(I) A centralized, key-distribution process (used in symmetric
cryptography), usually a separate computer system, that uses
master keys (i.e., KEKs) to encrypt and distribute session keys
needed by a community of users.
Shirey Informational [Page 172]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: An ANSI standard [A9017] defines two types of key
center: "key distribution center" and "key translation center".
$ key confirmation
(N) "The assurance [provided to] the legitimate participants in a
key establishment protocol that the [parties that are intended to
share] the symmetric key actually possess the shared symmetric
key." [A9042]
$ key distribution
(I) A process that delivers a cryptographic key from the location
where it is generated to the locations where it is used in a
cryptographic algorithm. (See: key establishment, key management.)
$ key distribution center (KDC)
1. (I) A type of key center (used in symmetric cryptography) that
implements a key-distribution protocol to provide keys (usually,
session keys) to two (or more) entities that wish to communicate
securely. (Compare: key translation center.)
2. (N) "COMSEC facility generating and distributing key in
electrical form." [C4009]
Tutorial: A KDC distributes keys to Alice and Bob, who (a) wish to
communicate with each other but do not currently share keys, (b)
each share a KEK with the KDC, and (c) may not be able to generate
or acquire keys by themselves. Alice requests the keys from the
KDC. The KDC generates or acquires the keys and makes two
identical sets. The KDC encrypts one set in the KEK it shares with
Alice, and sends that encrypted set to Alice. The KDC encrypts the
second set in the KEK it shares with Bob, and either (a) sends
that encrypted set to Alice for her to forward to Bob or (b) sends
it directly to Bob (although the latter option is not supported in
the ANSI standard [A9017]).
$ key encapsulation
(N) A key recovery technique for storing knowledge of a
cryptographic key by encrypting it with another key and ensuring
that only certain third parties called "recovery agents" can
perform the decryption operation to retrieve the stored key. Key
encapsulation typically permits direct retrieval of a secret key
used to provide data confidentiality. (Compare: key escrow.)
$ key-encrypting key (KEK)
(I) A cryptographic key that (a) is used to encrypt other keys
(either DEKs or other TEKs) for transmission or storage but (b)
(usually) is not used to encrypt application data. Usage:
Sometimes called "key-encryption key".
Shirey Informational [Page 173]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ key escrow
(N) A key recovery technique for storing knowledge of a
cryptographic key or parts thereof in the custody of one or more
third parties called "escrow agents", so that the key can be
recovered and used in specified circumstances. (Compare: key
encapsulation.)
Tutorial: Key escrow is typically implemented with split knowledge
techniques. For example, the Escrowed Encryption Standard [FP185]
entrusts two components of a device-unique split key to separate
escrow agents. The agents provide the components only to someone
legally authorized to conduct electronic surveillance of
telecommunications encrypted by that specific device. The
components are used to reconstruct the device-unique key, and it
is used to obtain the session key needed to decrypt
communications.
$ key establishment (algorithm or protocol)
1. (I) A procedure that combines the key-generation and key-
distribution steps needed to set up or install a secure
communication association.
2. (I) A procedure that results in keying material being shared
among two or more system entities. [A9042, SP56]
Tutorial: The two basic techniques for key establishment are "key
agreement" and "key transport".
$ Key Exchange Algorithm (KEA)
(N) A key-agreement method [SKIP, R2773] that is based on the
Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm and uses 1024-bit asymmetric keys.
(See: CAPSTONE, CLIPPER, FORTEZZA, SKIPJACK.)
Tutorial: KEA was developed by NSA and formerly classified at the
U.S. DoD "Secret" level. On 23 June 1998, the NSA announced that
KEA had been declassified.
$ key generation
(I) A process that creates the sequence of symbols that comprise a
cryptographic key. (See: key management.)
$ key generator
1. (I) An algorithm that uses mathematical rules to
deterministically produce a pseudorandom sequence of cryptographic
key values.
2. (I) An encryption device that incorporates a key-generation
mechanism and applies the key to plain text to produce cipher text
Shirey Informational [Page 174]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
(e.g., by exclusive OR-ing (a) a bit-string representation of the
key with (b) a bit-string representation of the plaintext).
$ key length
(I) The number of symbols (usually stated as a number of bits)
needed to be able to represent any of the possible values of a
cryptographic key. (See: key space.)
$ key lifetime
1. (D) Synonym for "cryptoperiod".
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with
definition 1 because a key's cryptoperiod may be only a part of
the key's lifetime. A key could be generated at some time prior to
when its cryptoperiod begins and might not be destroyed (i.e.,
zeroized) until some time after its cryptoperiod ends.
2. (O) /MISSI/ An attribute of a MISSI key pair that specifies a
time span that bounds the validity period of any MISSI X.509
public-key certificate that contains the public component of the
pair. (See: cryptoperiod.)
$ key loader
(N) Synonym for "fill device".
$ key loading and initialization facility (KLIF)
(N) A place where ECU hardware is activated after being
fabricated. (Compare: CLEF.)
Tutorial: Before going to its KLIF, an ECU is not ready to be
fielded, usually because it is not yet able to receive DEKs. The
KLIF employs trusted processes to complete the ECU by installing
needed data such as KEKs, seed values, and, in some cases,
cryptographic software. After KLIF processing, the ECU is ready
for deployment.
$ key management
1a. (I) The process of handling keying material during its life
cycle in a cryptographic system; and the supervision and control
of that process. (See: key distribution, key escrow, keying
material, public-key infrastructure.)
Usage: Usually understood to include ordering, generating,
storing, archiving, escrowing, distributing, loading, destroying,
auditing, and accounting for the material.
1b. (O) /NIST/ "The activities involving the handling of
cryptographic keys and other related security parameters (e.g.,
Shirey Informational [Page 175]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
IVs, counters) during the entire life cycle of the keys, including
their generation, storage, distribution, entry and use, deletion
or destruction, and archiving." [FP140, SP57]
2. (O) /OSIRM/ "The generation, storage, distribution, deletion,
archiving and application of keys in accordance with a security
policy." [I7498-2]
$ Key Management Protocol (KMP)
(N) A protocol to establish a shared symmetric key between a pair
(or a group) of users. (One version of KMP was developed by SDNS,
and another by SILS.) Superseded by ISAKMP and IKE.
$ key material
(D) Synonym for "keying material".
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"keying material".
$ key pair
(I) A set of mathematically related keys -- a public key and a
private key -- that are used for asymmetric cryptography and are
generated in a way that makes it computationally infeasible to
derive the private key from knowledge of the public key. (See:
Diffie-Hellman-Merkle, RSA.)
Tutorial: A key pair's owner discloses the public key to other
system entities so they can use the key to (a) encrypt data, (b)
verify a digital signature, or (c) generate a key with a key-
agreement algorithm. The matching private key is kept secret by
the owner, who uses it to (a') decrypt data, (b') generate a
digital signature, or (c') generate a key with a key-agreement
algorithm.
$ key recovery
1. (I) /cryptanalysis/ A process for learning the value of a
cryptographic key that was previously used to perform some
cryptographic operation. (See: cryptanalysis, recovery.)
2. (I) /backup/ Techniques that provide an intentional, alternate
means to access the key used for data confidentiality service in
an encrypted association. [DoD4] (Compare: recovery.)
Tutorial: It is assumed that the cryptographic system includes a
primary means of obtaining the key through a key-establishment
algorithm or protocol. For the secondary means, there are two
classes of key recovery techniques: key encapsulation and key
escrow.
Shirey Informational [Page 176]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ key space
(I) The range of possible values of a cryptographic key; or the
number of distinct transformations supported by a particular
cryptographic algorithm. (See: key length.)
$ key translation center
(I) A type of key center that implements a key-distribution
protocol (based on symmetric cryptography) to convey keys between
two (or more) parties who wish to communicate securely. (Compare:
key distribution center.)
Tutorial: A key translation center transfers keys for future
communication between Bob and Alice, who (a) wish to communicate
with each other but do not currently share keys, (b) each share a
KEK with the center, and (c) have the ability to generate or
acquire keys by themselves. Alice generates or acquires a set of
keys for communication with Bob. Alice encrypts the set in the KEK
she shares with the center and sends the encrypted set to the
center. The center decrypts the set, reencrypts the set in the KEK
it shares with Bob, and either (a) sends that reencrypted set to
Alice for her to forward to Bob or (b) sends it directly to Bob
(although direct distribution is not supported in the ANSI
standard [A9017]).
$ key transport (algorithm or protocol)
1. (I) A key establishment method by which a secret key is
generated by a system entity in a communication association and
securely sent to another entity in the association. (Compare: key
agreement.)
Tutorial: Either (a) one entity generates a secret key and
securely sends it to the other entity, or (b) each entity
generates a secret value and securely sends it to the other
entity, where the two values are combined to form a secret key.
For example, a message originator can generate a random session
key and then use the RSA algorithm to encrypt that key with the
public key of the intended recipient.
2. (O) "The procedure to send a symmetric key from one party to
other parties. As a result, all legitimate participants share a
common symmetric key in such a way that the symmetric key is
determined entirely by one party." [A9042]
$ key update
1. (I) Derive a new key from an existing key. (Compare: rekey.)
2. (O) Irreversible cryptographic process that modifies a key to
produce a new key. [C4009]
Shirey Informational [Page 177]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ key validation
1. (I) "The procedure for the receiver of a public key to check
that the key conforms to the arithmetic requirements for such a
key in order to thwart certain types of attacks." [A9042] (See:
weak key)
2. (D) Synonym for "certificate validation".
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the term as a synonym for
"certificate validation"; that would unnecessarily duplicate the
meaning of the latter term and mix concepts in a potentially
misleading way. In validating an X.509 public-key certificate, the
public key contained in the certificate is normally treated as an
opaque data object.
$ keyed hash
(I) A cryptographic hash (e.g., [R1828]) in which the mapping to a
hash result is varied by a second input parameter that is a
cryptographic key. (See: checksum.)
Tutorial: If the input data object is changed, a new,
corresponding hash result cannot be correctly computed without
knowledge of the secret key. Thus, the secret key protects the
hash result so it can be used as a checksum even when there is a
threat of an active attack on the data. There are two basic types
of keyed hash:
- A function based on a keyed encryption algorithm. Example: Data
Authentication Code.
- A function based on a keyless hash that is enhanced by
combining (e.g., by concatenating) the input data object
parameter with a key parameter before mapping to the hash
result. Example: HMAC.
$ keying material
1. (I) Data that is needed to establish and maintain a
cryptographic security association, such as keys, key pairs, and
IVs.
2. (O) "Key, code, or authentication information in physical or
magnetic form." [C4009] (Compare: COMSEC material.)
$ keying material identifier (KMID)
1. (I) An identifier assigned to an item of keying material.
2. (O) /MISSI/ A 64-bit identifier that is assigned to a key pair
when the public key is bound in a MISSI X.509 public-key
certificate.
Shirey Informational [Page 178]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Khafre
(N) A patented, symmetric block cipher designed by Ralph C. Merkle
as a plug-in replacement for DES. [Schn]
Tutorial: Khafre was designed for efficient encryption of small
amounts of data. However, because Khafre does not precompute
tables used for encryption, it is slower than Khufu for large
amounts of data.
$ Khufu
(N) A patented, symmetric block cipher designed by Ralph C. Merkle
as a plug-in replacement for DES. [Schn]
Tutorial: Khufu was designed for fast encryption of large amounts
of data. However, because Khufu precomputes tables used in
encryption, it is less efficient than Khafre for small amounts of
data.
$ KLIF
(N) See: key loading and initialization facility.
$ KMID
(I) See: keying material identifier.
$ known-plaintext attack
(I) A cryptanalysis technique in which the analyst tries to
determine the key from knowledge of some plaintext-ciphertext
pairs (although the analyst may also have other clues, such as
knowing the cryptographic algorithm).
$ kracker
(O) Old spelling for "cracker".
$ KSOS, KSOS-6, KSOS-11
(O) See: Kernelized Secure Operating System.
$ L2F
(N) See: Layer 2 Forwarding Protocol.
$ L2TP
(N) See: Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol.
$ label
See: time stamp, security label.
Shirey Informational [Page 179]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ laboratory attack
(O) "Use of sophisticated signal recovery equipment in a
laboratory environment to recover information from data storage
media." [C4009]
$ LAN
(I) Abbreviation for "local area network" [R1983]. (See: [FP191].)
$ land attack
(I) A denial-of-service attack that sends an IP packet that (a)
has the same address in both the Source Address and Destination
Address fields and (b) contains a TCP SYN packet that has the same
port number in both the Source Port and Destination Port fields.
Derivation: This single-packet attack was named for "land", the
program originally published by the cracker who invented this
exploit. Perhaps that name was chosen because the inventor thought
of multi-packet (i.e., flooding) attacks as arriving by sea.
$ Language of Temporal Ordering Specification (LOTOS)
(N) A language (ISO 8807-1990) for formal specification of
computer network protocols; describes the order in which events
occur.
$ lattice
(I) A finite set together with a partial ordering on its elements
such that for every pair of elements there is a least upper bound
and a greatest lower bound.
Example: A lattice is formed by a finite set S of security levels
-- i.e., a set S of all ordered pairs (x,c), where x is one of a
finite set X of hierarchically ordered classification levels X(1),
non-hierarchical categories C(1), ..., C(M) -- together with the
"dominate" relation. Security level (x,c) is said to "dominate"
(x',c') if and only if (a) x is greater (higher) than or equal to
x' and (b) c includes at least all of the elements of c'. (See:
dominate, lattice model.)
Tutorial: Lattices are used in some branches of cryptography, both
as a basis for hard computational problems upon which
cryptographic algorithms can be defined, and also as a basis for
attacks on cryptographic algorithms.
$ lattice model
1. (I) A description of the semantic structure formed by a finite
set of security levels, such as those used in military
organizations. (See: dominate, lattice, security model.)
Shirey Informational [Page 180]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (I) /formal model/ A model for flow control in a system, based
on the lattice that is formed by the finite security levels in a
system and their partial ordering. [Denn]
$ Law Enforcement Access Field (LEAF)
(N) A data item that is automatically embedded in data encrypted
by devices (e.g., CLIPPER chip) that implement the Escrowed
Encryption Standard.
$ Layer 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
(N) See: OSIRM.
$ Layer 2 Forwarding Protocol (L2F)
(N) An Internet protocol (originally developed by Cisco
Corporation) that uses tunneling of PPP over IP to create a
virtual extension of a dial-up link across a network, initiated by
the dial-up server and transparent to the dial-up user. (See:
L2TP.)
$ Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP)
(N) An Internet client-server protocol that combines aspects of
PPTP and L2F and supports tunneling of PPP over an IP network or
over frame relay or other switched network. (See: VPN.)
Tutorial: PPP can in turn encapsulate any OSIRM Layer 3 protocol.
Thus, L2TP does not specify security services; it depends on
protocols layered above and below it to provide any needed
security.
$ LDAP
(I) See: Lightweight Directory Access Protocol.
$ least common mechanism
(I) The principle that a security architecture should minimize
reliance on mechanisms that are shared by many users.
Tutorial: Shared mechanisms may include cross-talk paths that
permit a breach of data security, and it is difficult to make a
single mechanism operate in a correct and trusted manner to the
satisfaction of a wide range of users.
$ least privilege
(I) The principle that a security architecture should be designed
so that each system entity is granted the minimum system resources
and authorizations that the entity needs to do its work. (Compare:
economy of mechanism, least trust.)
Shirey Informational [Page 181]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: This principle tends to limit damage that can be caused
by an accident, error, or unauthorized act. This principle also
tends to reduce complexity and promote modularity, which can make
certification easier and more effective. This principle is similar
to the principle of protocol layering, wherein each layer provides
specific, limited communication services, and the functions in one
layer are independent of those in other layers.
$ least trust
(I) The principle that a security architecture should be designed
in a way that minimizes (a) the number of components that require
trust and (b) the extent to which each component is trusted.
(Compare: least privilege, trust level.)
$ legacy system
(I) A system that is in operation but will not be improved or
expanded while a new system is being developed to supersede it.
$ legal non-repudiation
(I) See: secondary definition under "non-repudiation".
$ leap of faith
1. (I) /general security/ Operating a system as though it began
operation in a secure state, even though it cannot be proven that
such a state was established (i.e., even though a security
compromise might have occurred at or before the time when
operation began).
2. (I) /COMSEC/ The initial part, i.e., the first communication
step, or steps, of a protocol that is vulnerable to attack
(especially a man-in-the-middle attack) during that part but, if
that part is completed without being attacked, is subsequently not
vulnerable in later steps (i.e., results in a secure communication
association for which no man-in-the-middle attack is possible).
Usage: This term is listed in English dictionaries, but their
definitions are broad and can be interpreted in many ways in
Internet contexts. Similarly, the definition stated here can be
interpreted in several ways. Therefore, IDOCs that use this term
(especially IDOCs that are protocol specifications) SHOULD state a
more specific definition for it.
Tutorial: In a protocol, a leap of faith typically consists of
accepting a claim of peer identity, data origin, or data integrity
without authenticating that claim. When a protocol includes such a
step, the protocol might also be designed so that if a man-in-
the-middle attack succeeds during the vulnerable first part, then
the attacker must remain in the middle for all subsequent
Shirey Informational [Page 182]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
exchanges or else one of the legitimate parties will be able to
detect the attack.
$ level of concern
(N) /U.S. DoD/ A rating assigned to an information system that
indicates the extent to which protective measures, techniques, and
procedures must be applied. (See: critical, sensitive, level of
robustness.)
$ level of robustness
(N) /U.S. DoD/ A characterization of (a) the strength of a
security function, mechanism, service, or solution and (b) the
assurance (or confidence) that it is implemented and functioning.
[Cons, IATF] (See: level of concern.)
$ Liberty Alliance
(O) An international consortium of more than 150 commercial,
nonprofit, and governmental organizations that was created in 2001
to address technical, business, and policy problems of identity
and identity-based Web services and develop a standard for
federated network identity that supports current and emerging
network devices.
$ Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)
(I) An Internet client-server protocol (RFC 3377) that supports
basic use of the X.500 Directory (or other directory servers)
without incurring the resource requirements of the full Directory
Access Protocol (DAP).
Tutorial: Designed for simple management and browser applications
that provide simple read/write interactive directory service.
Supports both simple authentication and strong authentication of
the client to the directory server.
$ link
1a. (I) A communication facility or physical medium that can
sustain data communications between multiple network nodes, in the
protocol layer immediately below IP. (RFC 3753)
1b. (I) /subnetwork/ A communication channel connecting subnetwork
relays (especially one between two packet switches) that is
implemented at OSIRM Layer 2. (See: link encryption.)
Tutorial: The relay computers assume that links are logically
passive. If a computer at one end of a link sends a sequence of
bits, the sequence simply arrives at the other end after a finite
time, although some bits may have been changed either accidentally
(errors) or by active wiretapping.
Shirey Informational [Page 183]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (I) /World Wide Web/ See: hyperlink.
$ link encryption
(I) Stepwise (link-by-link) protection of data that flows between
two points in a network, provided by encrypting data separately on
each network link, i.e., by encrypting data when it leaves a host
or subnetwork relay and decrypting when it arrives at the next
host or relay. Each link may use a different key or even a
different algorithm. [R1455] (Compare: end-to-end encryption.)
$ liveness
(I) A property of a communication association or a feature of a
communication protocol that provides assurance to the recipient of
data that the data is being freshly transmitted by its originator,
i.e., that the data is not being replayed, by either the
originator or a third party, from a previous transmission. (See:
fresh, nonce, replay attack.)
$ logic bomb
(I) Malicious logic that activates when specified conditions are
met. Usually intended to cause denial of service or otherwise
damage system resources. (See: Trojan horse, virus, worm.)
$ login
1a. (I) An act by which a system entity establishes a session in
which the entity can use system resources. (See: principal,
session.)
1b. (I) An act by which a system user has its identity
authenticated by the system. (See: principal, session.)
Usage: Usually understood to be accomplished by providing an
identifier and matching authentication information (e.g., a
password) to a security mechanism that authenticates the user's
identity; but sometimes refers to establishing a connection with a
server when no authentication or specific authorization is
involved.
Derivation: Refers to "log" file, a security audit trail that
records (a) security events, such as the beginning of a session,
and (b) the names of the system entities that initiate events.
$ long title
(O) /U.S. Government/ "Descriptive title of [an item of COMSEC
material]." [C4009] (Compare: short title.)
Shirey Informational [Page 184]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ low probability of detection
(I) Result of TRANSEC measures used to hide or disguise a
communication.
$ low probability of intercept
(I) Result of TRANSEC measures used to prevent interception of a
communication.
$ LOTOS
(N) See: Language of Temporal Ordering Specification.
$ MAC
(N) See: mandatory access control, Message Authentication Code.
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because this abbreviation is ambiguous.
$ magnetic remanence
(N) Magnetic representation of residual information remaining on a
magnetic medium after the medium has been cleared. [NCS25] (See:
clear, degauss, purge.)
$ main mode
(I) See: /IKE/ under "mode".
$ maintenance hook
(N) "Special instructions (trapdoors) in software allowing easy
maintenance and additional feature development. Since maintenance
hooks frequently allow entry into the code without the usual
checks, they are a serious security risk if they are not removed
prior to live implementation." [C4009] (See: back door.)
$ malicious logic
(I) Hardware, firmware, or software that is intentionally included
or inserted in a system for a harmful purpose. (See: logic bomb,
Trojan horse, spyware, virus, worm. Compare: secondary definitions
under "corruption", "incapacitation", "masquerade", and "misuse".)
$ malware
(D) A contraction of "malicious software". (See: malicious logic.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is not listed
in most dictionaries and could confuse international readers.
$ MAN
(I) metropolitan area network.
Shirey Informational [Page 185]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ man-in-the-middle attack
(I) A form of active wiretapping attack in which the attacker
intercepts and selectively modifies communicated data to
masquerade as one or more of the entities involved in a
communication association. (See: hijack attack, piggyback attack.)
Tutorial: For example, suppose Alice and Bob try to establish a
session key by using the Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm without
data origin authentication service. A "man in the middle" could
(a) block direct communication between Alice and Bob and then (b)
masquerade as Alice sending data to Bob, (c) masquerade as Bob
sending data to Alice, (d) establish separate session keys with
each of them, and (e) function as a clandestine proxy server
between them to capture or modify sensitive information that Alice
and Bob think they are sending only to each other.
$ manager
(I) A person who controls the service configuration of a system or
the functional privileges of operators and other users. (See:
administrative security. Compare: operator, SSO, user.)
$ mandatory access control
1. (I) An access control service that enforces a security policy
based on comparing (a) security labels, which indicate how
sensitive or critical system resources are, with (b) security
clearances, which indicate that system entities are eligible to
access certain resources. (See: discretionary access control, MAC,
rule-based security policy.)
Derivation: This kind of access control is called "mandatory"
because an entity that has clearance to access a resource is not
permitted, just by its own volition, to enable another entity to
access that resource.
2. (O) "A means of restricting access to objects based on the
sensitivity (as represented by a label) of the information
contained in the objects and the formal authorization (i.e.,
clearance) of subjects to access information of such sensitivity."
[DoD1]
$ manipulation detection code
(D) Synonym for "checksum".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"checksum"; the word "manipulation" implies protection against
active attacks, which an ordinary checksum might not provide.
Instead, if such protection is intended, use "protected checksum"
or some particular type thereof, depending on which is meant. If
Shirey Informational [Page 186]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
such protection is not intended, use "error detection code" or
some specific type of checksum that is not protected.
$ marking
See: time stamp, security marking.
$ MARS
(O) A symmetric, 128-bit block cipher with variable key length
(128 to 448 bits), developed by IBM as a candidate for the AES.
$ Martian
(D) /slang/ A packet that arrives unexpectedly at the wrong
address or on the wrong network because of incorrect routing or
because it has a non-registered or ill-formed IP address. [R1208]
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ masquerade
(I) A type of threat action whereby an unauthorized entity gains
access to a system or performs a malicious act by illegitimately
posing as an authorized entity. (See: deception.)
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- "Spoof": Attempt by an unauthorized entity to gain access to a
system by posing as an authorized user.
- "Malicious logic": In context of masquerade, any hardware,
firmware, or software (e.g., Trojan horse) that appears to
perform a useful or desirable function, but actually gains
unauthorized access to system resources or tricks a user into
executing other malicious logic. (See: corruption,
incapacitation, main entry for "malicious logic", misuse.)
$ MCA
(O) See: merchant certification authority.
$ MD2
(N) A cryptographic hash [R1319] that produces a 128-bit hash
result, was designed by Ron Rivest, and is similar to MD4 and MD5
but slower.
Derivation: Apparently, an abbreviation of "message digest", but
that term is deprecated by this Glossary.
Shirey Informational [Page 187]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ MD4
(N) A cryptographic hash [R1320] that produces a 128-bit hash
result and was designed by Ron Rivest. (See: Derivation under
"MD2", SHA-1.)
$ MD5
(N) A cryptographic hash [R1321] that produces a 128-bit hash
result and was designed by Ron Rivest to be an improved version of
MD4. (See: Derivation under "MD2".)
$ merchant
(O) /SET/ "A seller of goods, services, and/or other information
who accepts payment for these items electronically." [SET2] A
merchant may also provide electronic selling services and/or
electronic delivery of items for sale. With SET, the merchant can
offer its cardholders secure electronic interactions, but a
merchant that accepts payment cards is required to have a
relationship with an acquirer. [SET1, SET2]
$ merchant certificate
(O) /SET/ A public-key certificate issued to a merchant. Sometimes
used to refer to a pair of such certificates where one is for
digital signature use and the other is for encryption.
$ merchant certification authority (MCA)
(O) /SET/ A CA that issues digital certificates to merchants and
is operated on behalf of a payment card brand, an acquirer, or
another party according to brand rules. Acquirers verify and
approve requests for merchant certificates prior to issuance by
the MCA. An MCA does not issue a CRL, but does distribute CRLs
issued by root CAs, brand CAs, geopolitical CAs, and payment
gateway CAs. [SET2]
$ mesh PKI
(I) A non-hierarchical PKI architecture in which there are several
trusted CAs rather than a single root. Each certificate user bases
path validations on the public key of one of the trusted CAs,
usually the one that issued that user's own public-key
certificate. Rather than having superior-to-subordinate
relationships between CAs, the relationships are peer-to-peer, and
CAs issue cross-certificates to each other. (Compare: hierarchical
PKI, trust-file PKI.)
$ Message Authentication Code (MAC), message authentication code
1. (N) /capitalized/ A specific ANSI standard for a checksum that
is computed with a keyed hash that is based on DES. [A9009] Usage:
a.k.a. Data Authentication Code, which is a U.S. Government
standard. [FP113] (See: MAC.)
Shirey Informational [Page 188]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (D) /not capitalized/ Synonym for "error detection code".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the uncapitalized form
"message authentication code". Instead, use "checksum", "error
detection code", "hash", "keyed hash", "Message Authentication
Code", or "protected checksum", depending on what is meant. (See:
authentication code.)
The uncapitalized form mixes concepts in a potentially misleading
way. The word "message" is misleading because it implies that the
mechanism is particularly suitable for or limited to electronic
mail (see: Message Handling Systems). The word "authentication" is
misleading because the mechanism primarily serves a data integrity
function rather than an authentication function. The word "code"
is misleading because it implies that either encoding or
encryption is involved or that the term refers to computer
software.
$ message digest
(D) Synonym for "hash result". (See: cryptographic hash.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"hash result"; this term unnecessarily duplicates the meaning of
the other, more general term and mixes concepts in a potentially
misleading way. The word "message" is misleading because it
implies that the mechanism is particularly suitable for or limited
to electronic mail (see: Message Handling Systems).
$ message handling system
(D) Synonym for the Internet electronic mail system.
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term, because it could
be confused with Message Handling System. Instead, use "Internet
electronic mail" or some other, more specific term.
$ Message Handling System
(O) An ITU-T system concept that encompasses the notion of
electronic mail but defines more comprehensive OSI systems and
services that enable users to exchange messages on a store-and-
forward basis. (The ISO equivalent is "Message Oriented Text
Interchange System".) (See: X.400.)
$ message indicator
1. (D) /cryptographic function/ Synonym for "initialization
value". (Compare: indicator.)
2. (D) "Sequence of bits transmitted over a communications system
for synchronizing cryptographic equipment." [C4009]
Shirey Informational [Page 189]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"initialization value"; the term mixes concepts in a potentially
misleading way. The word "message" is misleading because it
suggests that the mechanism is specific to electronic mail. (See:
Message Handling System.)
$ message integrity check
$ message integrity code (MIC)
(D) Synonyms for some form of "checksum".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use these terms for any form of
checksum. Instead, use "checksum", "error detection code", "hash",
"keyed hash", "Message Authentication Code", or "protected
checksum", depending on what is meant.
These two terms mix concepts in potentially misleading ways. The
word "message" is misleading because it suggests that the
mechanism is particularly suitable for or limited to electronic
mail. The word "integrity" is misleading because the checksum may
be used to perform a data origin authentication function rather
than an integrity function. The word "code" is misleading because
it suggests either that encoding or encryption is involved or that
the term refers to computer software.
$ Message Security Protocol (MSP)
(N) A secure message handling protocol [SDNS7] for use with X.400
and Internet mail protocols. Developed by NSA's SDNS program and
used in the U.S. DoD's Defense Message System.
$ meta-data
(I) Descriptive information about a data object; i.e., data about
data, or data labels that describe other data. (See: security
label. Compare: metadata)
Tutorial: Meta-data can serve various management purposes:
- System management: File name, type, size, creation date.
- Application management: Document title, version, author.
- Usage management: Data categories, keywords, classifications.
Meta-data can be associated with a data object in two basic ways:
- Explicitly: Be part of the data object (e.g., a header field of
a data file or packet) or be linked to the object.
- Implicitly: Be associated with the data object because of some
other, explicit attribute of the object.
$ metadata, Metadata(trademark), METADATA(trademark)
(D) Proprietary variants of "meta-data". (See: SPAM(trademark).)
Shirey Informational [Page 190]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use these unhypenated forms;
IDOCs SHOULD use only the uncapitalized, hyphenated "meta-data".
The terms "Metadata" and "METADATA" are claimed as registered
trademarks (numbers 1,409,260 and 2,185,504) owned by The Metadata
Company, originally known as Metadata Information Partners, a
company founded by Jack Myers. The status of "metadata" is
unclear.
$ MHS
(N) See: message handling system.
$ MIC
(D) See: message integrity code.
$ MIME
(I) See: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions.
$ MIME Object Security Services (MOSS)
(I) An Internet protocol [R1848] that applies end-to-end
encryption and digital signature to MIME message content, using
symmetric cryptography for encryption and asymmetric cryptography
for key distribution and signature. MOSS is based on features and
specifications of PEM. (See: S/MIME.)
$ Minimum Interoperability Specification for PKI Components (MISPC)
(N) A technical description to provide a basis for interoperation
between PKI components from different vendors; consists primarily
of a profile of certificate and CRL extensions and a set of
transactions for PKI operation. [SP15]
$ misappropriation
(I) A type of threat action whereby an entity assumes unauthorized
logical or physical control of a system resource. (See:
usurpation.)
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- Theft of data: Unauthorized acquisition and use of data
contained in a system.
- Theft of service: Unauthorized use of a system service.
- Theft of functionality: Unauthorized acquisition of actual
hardware, firmware, or software of a system component.
$ MISPC
(N) See: Minimum Interoperability Specification for PKI
Components.
Shirey Informational [Page 191]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ MISSI
(O) Multilevel Information System Security Initiative, an NSA
program to encourage development of interoperable, modular
products for constructing secure network information systems in
support of a wide variety of U.S. Government missions. (See: MSP,
SP3, SP4.)
$ MISSI user
(O) /MISSI/ A system entity that is the subject of one or more
MISSI X.509 public-key certificates issued under a MISSI
certification hierarchy. (See: personality.)
Tutorial: MISSI users include both end users and the authorities
that issue certificates. A MISSI user is usually a person but may
be a machine or other automated process. Machines that are
required to operate nonstop may be issued their own certificates
to avoid downtime needed to exchange the FORTEZZA cards of machine
operators at shift changes.
$ mission
(I) A statement of a (relatively long-term) duty or (relatively
short-term) task that is assigned to an organization or system,
indicates the purpose and objectives of the duty or task, and may
indicate the actions to be taken to achieve it.
$ mission critical
(I) A condition of a system service or other system resource such
that denial of access to, or lack of availability of, the resource
would jeopardize a system user's ability to perform a primary
mission function or would result in other serious consequences.
(See: Critical. Compare: mission essential.)
$ mission essential
(O) /U.S. DoD/ Refers to materiel that is authorized and available
to combat, combat support, combat service support, and combat
readiness training forces to accomplish their assigned missions.
[JP1] (Compare: mission critical.)
$ misuse
1. (I) The intentional use (by authorized users) of system
resources for other than authorized purposes. Example: An
authorized system administrator creates an unauthorized account
for a friend. (See: misuse detection.)
2. (I) A type of threat action that causes a system component to
perform a function or service that is detrimental to system
security. (See: usurpation.)
Shirey Informational [Page 192]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- "Tampering": /misuse/ Deliberately altering a system's logic,
data, or control information to cause the system to perform
unauthorized functions or services. (See: corruption, main
entry for "tampering".)
- "Malicious logic": /misuse/ Any hardware, firmware, or software
intentionally introduced into a system to perform or control
execution of an unauthorized function or service. (See:
corruption, incapacitation, main entry for "malicious logic",
masquerade.)
- "Violation of authorizations": Action by an entity that exceeds
the entity's system privileges by executing an unauthorized
function. (See: authorization.)
$ misuse detection
(I) An intrusion detection method that is based on rules that
specify system events, sequences of events, or observable
properties of a system that are believed to be symptomatic of
security incidents. (See: IDS, misuse. Compare: anomaly
detection.)
$ MLS
(I) See: multilevel secure
$ mobile code
1a. (I) Software that originates from a remote server, is
transmitted across a network, and is loaded onto and executed on a
local client system without explicit initiation by the client's
user and, in some cases, without that user's knowledge. (Compare:
active content.)
Tutorial: One form of mobile code is active content in a file that
is transferred across a network.
1b. (O) /U.S. DoD/ "Software modules obtained from remote systems,
transferred across a network, and then downloaded and executed on
local systems without explicit installation or execution by the
recipient." [JP1]
2a. (O) /U.S. DoD/ Technology that enables the creation of
executable information that can be delivered to an information
system and directly executed on any hardware/software architecture
that has an appropriate host execution environment.
2b. (O) "Programs (e.g., script, macro, or other portable
instruction) that can be shipped unchanged to a heterogeneous
collection of platforms and executed with identical semantics"
[SP28]. (See: active content.)
Shirey Informational [Page 193]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Mobile code might be malicious. Using techniques such as
"code signing" and a "sandbox" can reduce the risks of receiving
and executing mobile code.
$ mode
$ mode of operation
1. (I) /cryptographic operation/ A technique for enhancing the
effect of a cryptographic algorithm or adapting the algorithm for
an application, such as applying a block cipher to a sequence of
data blocks or a data stream. (See: CBC, CCM, CMAC, CFB, CTR, ECB,
OFB.)
2. (I) /system operation/ A type of security policy that states
the range of classification levels of information that a system is
permitted to handle and the range of clearances and authorizations
of users who are permitted to access the system. (See:
compartmented security mode, controlled security mode, dedicated
security mode, multilevel security mode, partitioned security
mode, system-high security mode. Compare: protection level.)
3. (I) /IKE/ IKE refers to its various types of ISAKMP-scripted
exchanges of messages as "modes". Among these are the following:
- "Main mode": One of IKE's two phase 1 modes. (See: ISAKMP.)
- "Quick mode": IKE's only phase 2 mode. (See: ISAKMP.)
$ model
See: formal model, security model.
$ modulus
(I) The defining constant in modular arithmetic, and usually a
part of the public key in asymmetric cryptography that is based on
modular arithmetic. (See: Diffie-Hellman-Merkle, RSA.)
$ Mondex
(O) A smartcard-based electronic money system that incorporates
cryptography and can be used to make payments via the Internet.
(See: IOTP.)
$ Morris Worm
(I) A worm program that flooded the ARPANET in November 1988,
causing problems for thousands of hosts. [R1135] (See: community
risk, worm)
$ MOSS
(I) See: MIME Object Security Services.
Shirey Informational [Page 194]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ MQV
(N) A key-agreement protocol [Mene] that was proposed by A.J.
Menezes, M. Qu, and S.A. Vanstone in 1995 and is based on the
Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm.
$ MSP
(N) See: Message Security Protocol.
$ multicast security
See: secure multicast
$ Multics
(N) MULTiplexed Information and Computing Service, an MLS computer
timesharing system designed and implemented during 1965-69 by a
consortium including Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
General Electric, and Bell Laboratories, and later offered
commercially by Honeywell.
Tutorial: Multics was one of the first large, general-purpose,
operating systems to include security as a primary goal from the
inception of the design and development and was rated in TCSEC
Class B2. Its many innovative hardware and software security
mechanisms (e.g., protection ring) were adopted by later systems.
$ multilevel secure (MLS)
(I) Describes an information system that is trusted to contain,
and maintain separation between, resources (particularly stored
data) of different security levels. (Examples: BLACKER, CANEWARE,
KSOS, Multics, SCOMP.)
Usage: Usually understood to mean that the system permits
concurrent access by users who differ in their access
authorizations, while denying users access to resources for which
they lack authorization.
$ multilevel security mode
1. (N) A mode of system operation wherein (a) two or more security
levels of information are allowed to be to be handled concurrently
within the same system when some users having access to the system
have neither a security clearance nor need-to-know for some of the
data handled by the system and (b) separation of the users and the
classified material on the basis, respectively, of clearance and
classification level are dependent on operating system control.
(See: /system operation/ under "mode", need to know, protection
level, security clearance. Compare: controlled mode.)
Shirey Informational [Page 195]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: Usually abbreviated as "multilevel mode". This term was
defined in U.S. Government policy regarding system accreditation,
but the term is also used outside the Government.
2. (O) A mode of system operation in which all three of the
following statements are true: (a) Some authorized users do not
have a security clearance for all the information handled in the
system. (b) All authorized users have the proper security
clearance and appropriate specific access approval for the
information to which they have access. (c) All authorized users
have a need-to-know only for information to which they have
access. [C4009] (See: formal access approval, protection level.)
$ Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME)
(I) An Internet protocol (RFC 2045) that enhances the basic format
of Internet electronic mail messages (RFC 822) (a) to enable
character sets other than U.S. ASCII to be used for textual
headers and content and (b) to carry non-textual and multi-part
content. (See: S/MIME.)
$ mutual suspicion
(I) The state that exists between two interacting system entities
in which neither entity can trust the other to function correctly
with regard to some security requirement.
$ name
(I) Synonym for "identifier".
$ naming authority
(O) /U.S. DoD/ An organizational entity responsible for assigning
DNs and for assuring that each DN is meaningful and unique within
its domain. [DoD9]
$ National Computer Security Center (NCSC)
(O) A U.S. DoD organization, housed in NSA, that has
responsibility for encouraging widespread availability of trusted
systems throughout the U.S. Federal Government. It has established
criteria for, and performed evaluations of, computer and network
systems that have a TCB. (See: Rainbow Series, TCSEC.)
$ National Information Assurance Partnership (NIAP)
(N) A joint initiative of NIST and NSA to enhance the quality of
commercial products for information security and increase consumer
confidence in those products through objective evaluation and
testing methods.
Shirey Informational [Page 196]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: NIAP is registered, through the U.S. DoD, as a National
Performance Review Reinvention Laboratory. NIAP functions include
the following:
- Developing tests, test methods, and other tools that developers
and testing laboratories may use to improve and evaluate
security products.
- Collaborating with industry and others on research and testing
programs.
- Using the Common Criteria to develop protection profiles and
associated test sets for security products and systems.
- Cooperating with the NIST National Voluntary Laboratory
Accreditation Program to develop a program to accredit private-
sector laboratories for the testing of information security
products using the Common Criteria.
- Working to establish a formal, international mutual recognition
scheme for a Common Criteria-based evaluation.
$ National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
(N) A U.S. Department of Commerce organization that promotes U.S.
economic growth by working with industry to develop and apply
technology, measurements, and standards. Has primary U.S.
Government responsibility for INFOSEC standards for sensitive
unclassified information. (See: ANSI, DES, DSA, DSS, FIPS, NIAP,
NSA.)
$ National Reliability and Interoperability Council (NRIC)
(N) An advisory committee chartered by the U.S. Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), with participation by network
service providers and vendors, to provide recommendations to the
FCC for assuring reliability, interoperability, robustness, and
security of wireless, wireline, satellite, cable, and public data
communication networks.
$ national security
(O) /U.S. Government/ The national defense or foreign relations of
the United States of America.
$ National Security Agency (NSA)
(N) A U.S. DoD organization that has primary U.S. Government
responsibility for INFOSEC standards for classified information
and for sensitive unclassified information handled by national
security systems. (See: FORTEZZA, KEA, MISSI, national security
system, NIAP, NIST, SKIPJACK.)
$ national security information
(O) /U.S. Government/ Information that has been determined,
pursuant to Executive Order 12958 or any predecessor order, to
require protection against unauthorized disclosure. [C4009]
Shirey Informational [Page 197]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ national security system
(O) /U.S. Government/ Any Government-operated information system
for which the function, operation, or use (a) involves
intelligence activities; (b) involves cryptologic activities
related to national security; (c) involves command and control of
military forces; (d) involves equipment that is an integral part
of a weapon or weapon system; or (e) is critical to the direct
fulfillment of military or intelligence missions and does not
include a system that is to be used for routine administrative and
business applications (including payroll, finance, logistics, and
personnel management applications). [Title 40 U.S.C. Section 1552,
Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996.] (See: type
2 product.)
$ natural disaster
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definitions under "corruption"
and "incapacitation".
$ NCSC
(O) See: National Computer Security Center.
$ need to know, need-to-know
(I) The necessity for access to, knowledge of, or possession of
specific information required to carry out official duties.
Usage: The compound "need-to-know" is commonly used as either an
adjective or a noun.
Tutorial: The need-to-know criterion is used in security
procedures that require a custodian of sensitive information,
prior to disclosing the information to someone else, to establish
that the intended recipient has proper authorization to access the
information.
$ network
(I) An information system comprised of a collection of
interconnected nodes. (See: computer network.)
$ Network Hardware Layer
(I) See: Internet Protocol Suite.
$ Network Interface Layer
(I) See: Internet Protocol Suite.
$ Network Layer Security Protocol (NLSP).
(N) An OSI protocol (IS0 11577) for end-to-end encryption services
at the top of OSIRM Layer 3. NLSP is derived from SP3 but is more
complex. (Compare: IPsec.)
Shirey Informational [Page 198]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Network Substrate Layer
(I) Synonym for "Network Hardware Layer".
$ network weaving
(I) A penetration technique in which an intruder avoids detection
and traceback by using multiple, linked, communication networks to
access and attack a system. [C4009]
$ NIAP
(N) See: National Information Assurance Partnership.
$ nibble
(D) Half of a byte (i.e., usually, 4 bits).
Deprecated Term: To avoid international misunderstanding, IDOCs
SHOULD NOT use this term; instead, state the size of the block
explicitly (e.g., "4-bit block"). (See: Deprecated Usage under
"Green Book".)
$ NIPRNET
(O) The U.S. DoD's common-use Non-Classified Internet Protocol
Router Network; the part of the Internet that is wholly controlled
by the U.S. DoD and is used for official DoD business.
$ NIST
(N) See: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
$ NLSP
(N) See: Network Layer Security Protocol
$ no-lone zone
(I) A room or other space or area to which no person may have
unaccompanied access and that, when occupied, is required to be
occupied by two or more appropriately authorized persons. [C4009]
(See: dual control.)
$ no-PIN ORA (NORA)
(O) /MISSI/ An organizational RA that operates in a mode in which
the ORA performs no card management functions and, therefore, does
not require knowledge of either the SSO PIN or user PIN for an end
user's FORTEZZA PC card.
$ node
(I) A collection of related subsystems located on one or more
computer platforms at a single site. (See: site.)
Shirey Informational [Page 199]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ nonce
(I) A random or non-repeating value that is included in data
exchanged by a protocol, usually for the purpose of guaranteeing
liveness and thus detecting and protecting against replay attacks.
(See: fresh.)
$ non-critical
See: critical.
$ non-repudiation service
1. (I) A security service that provide protection against false
denial of involvement in an association (especially a
communication association that transfers data). (See: repudiation,
time stamp.)
Tutorial: Two separate types of denial are possible -- an entity
can deny that it sent a data object, or it can deny that it
received a data object -- and, therefore, two separate types of
non-repudiation service are possible. (See: non-repudiation with
proof of origin, non-repudiation with proof of receipt.)
2. (D) "Assurance [that] the sender of data is provided with proof
of delivery and the recipient is provided with proof of the
sender's identity, so neither can later deny having processed the
data." [C4009]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use definition 2 because
it bundles two security services -- non-repudiation with proof of
origin, and non-repudiation with proof of receipt -- that can be
provided independently of each other.
Usage: IDOCs SHOULD distinguish between the technical aspects and
the legal aspects of a non-repudiation service:
- "Technical non-repudiation": Refers to the assurance a relying
party has that if a public key is used to validate a digital
signature, then that signature had to have been made by the
corresponding private signature key. [SP32]
- "Legal non-repudiation": Refers to how well possession or
control of the private signature key can be established. [SP32]
Tutorial: Non-repudiation service does not prevent an entity from
repudiating a communication. Instead, the service provides
evidence that can be stored and later presented to a third party
to resolve disputes that arise if and when a communication is
repudiated by one of the entities involved.
Shirey Informational [Page 200]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Ford describes the six phases of a complete non-repudiation
service and uses "critical action" to refer to the act of
communication that is the subject of the service [For94, For97]:
-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- . --------
Phase 1: Phase 2: Phase 3: Phase 4: Phase 5: . Phase 6:
Request Generate Transfer Verify Retain . Resolve
Service Evidence Evidence Evidence Evidence . Dispute
-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- . --------
Service Critical Evidence Evidence Archive . Evidence
Request => Action => Stored => Is => Evidence . Is
Is Made Occurs For Later Tested In Case . Verified
and Use | ^ Critical . ^
Evidence v | Action Is . |
Is +-------------------+ Repudiated . |
Generated |Verifiable Evidence|------> ... . ----+
+-------------------+
Phase / Explanation
-------------------
1. Request service: Before the critical action, the service
requester asks, either implicitly or explicitly, to have
evidence of the action be generated.
2. Generate evidence: When the critical action occurs, evidence is
generated by a process involving the potential repudiator and
possibly also a trusted third party.
3. Transfer evidence: The evidence is transferred to the requester
or stored by a third party, for later use (if needed).
4. Verify evidence: The entity that holds the evidence tests it to
be sure that it will suffice if a dispute arises.
5. Retain evidence: The evidence is retained for possible future
retrieval and use.
6. Resolve dispute: In this phase, which occurs only if the
critical action is repudiated, the evidence is retrieved from
storage, presented, and verified to resolve the dispute.
$ non-repudiation with proof of origin
(I) A security service that provides the recipient of data with
evidence that proves the origin of the data, and thus protects the
recipient against an attempt by the originator to falsely deny
sending the data. (See: non-repudiation service.)
Tutorial: This service is a strong version of data origin
authentication service. This service can not only verify the
identity of a system entity that is the original source of
received data; it can also provide proof of that identity to a
third party.
Shirey Informational [Page 201]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ non-repudiation with proof of receipt
(I) A security service that provides the originator of data with
evidence that proves the data was received as addressed, and thus
protects the originator against an attempt by the recipient to
falsely deny receiving the data. (See: non-repudiation service.)
$ non-volatile media
(I) Storage media that, once written into, provide stable storage
of information without an external power supply. (Compare:
permanent storage, volatile media.)
$ NORA
(O) See: no-PIN ORA.
$ notarization
(I) Registration of data under the authority or in the care of a
trusted third party, thus making it possible to provide subsequent
assurance of the accuracy of characteristics claimed for the data,
such as content, origin, time of existence, and delivery.
[I7498-2] (See: digital notary.)
$ NRIC
(N) See: Network Reliability and Interoperability Council.
$ NSA
(N) See: National Security Agency
$ null
(N) /encryption/ "Dummy letter, letter symbol, or code group
inserted into an encrypted message to delay or prevent its
decryption or to complete encrypted groups for transmission or
transmission security purposes." [C4009]
$ NULL encryption algorithm
(I) An algorithm [R2410] that is specified as doing nothing to
transform plaintext data; i.e., a no-op. It originated because ESP
always specifies the use of an encryption algorithm for
confidentiality. The NULL encryption algorithm is a convenient way
to represent the option of not applying encryption in ESP (or in
any other context where a no-op is needed). (Compare: null.)
$ OAKLEY
(I) A key establishment protocol (proposed for IPsec but
superseded by IKE) based on the Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm
and designed to be a compatible component of ISAKMP. [R2412]
Tutorial: OAKLEY establishes a shared key with an assigned
identifier and associated authenticated identities for parties;
Shirey Informational [Page 202]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
i.e., OAKLEY provides authentication service to ensure the
entities of each other's identity, even if the Diffie-Hellman-
Merkle exchange is threatened by active wiretapping. Also, it
provides public-key forward secrecy for the shared key and
supports key updates, incorporation of keys distributed by out-of-
band mechanisms, and user-defined abstract group structures for
use with Diffie-Hellman-Merkle.
$ object
(I) /formal model/ Trusted-system modeling usage: A system
component that contains or receives information. (See: Bell-
LaPadula model, object reuse, trusted system.)
$ object identifier (OID)
1. (N) An official, globally unique name for a thing, written as a
sequence of integers (which are formed and assigned as defined in
the ASN.1 standard) and used to reference the thing in abstract
specifications and during negotiation of security services in a
protocol.
2. (O) "A value (distinguishable from all other such values)
[that] is associated with an object." [X680]
Tutorial: Objects named by OIDs are leaves of the object
identifier tree (which is similar to but different from the X.500
Directory Information Tree). Each arc (i.e., each branch of the
tree) is labeled with a non-negative integer. An OID is the
sequence of integers on the path leading from the root of the tree
to a named object.
The OID tree has three arcs immediately below the root: {0} for
use by ITU-T, {1} for use by ISO, and {2} for use by both jointly.
Below ITU-T are four arcs, where {0 0} is for ITU-T
recommendations. Below {0 0} are 26 arcs, one for each series of
recommendations starting with the letters A to Z, and below these
are arcs for each recommendation. Thus, the OID for ITU-T
Recommendation X.509 is {0 0 24 509}. Below ISO are four arcs,
where {1 0 }is for ISO standards, and below these are arcs for
each ISO standard. Thus, the OID for ISO/IEC 9594-8 (the ISO
number for X.509) is {1 0 9594 8}.
ANSI registers organization names below the branch {joint-iso-
ccitt(2) country(16) US(840) organization(1) gov(101) csor(3)}.
The NIST CSOR records PKI objects below the branch {joint-iso-itu-
t(2) country(16) us(840) organization (1) gov(101) csor(3)}. The
U.S. DoD registers INFOSEC objects below the branch {joint-iso-
itu-t(2) country(16) us(840) organization(1) gov(101) dod(2)
infosec(1)}.
Shirey Informational [Page 203]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
The IETF's Public-Key Infrastructure (pkix) Working Group
registers PKI objects below the branch {iso(1) identified-
organization(3) dod(6) internet(1) security(5) mechanisms(5)
pkix(7)}. [R3280]
$ object reuse
(N) /COMPUSEC/ Reassignment and reuse of an area of a storage
medium (e.g., random-access memory, floppy disk, magnetic tape)
that once contained sensitive data objects. Before being
reassigned for use by a new subject, the area needs to be erased
or, in some cases, purged. [NCS04] (See: object.)
$ obstruction
(I) A type of threat action that interrupts delivery of system
services by hindering system operations. (See: disruption.)
Tutorial: This type of threat action includes the following
subtypes:
- "Interference": Disruption of system operations by blocking
communication of user data or control information. (See:
jamming.)
- "Overload": Hindrance of system operation by placing excess
burden on the performance capabilities of a system component.
(See: flooding.)
$ OCSP
(I) See: Online Certificate Status Protocol.
$ octet
(I) A data unit of eight bits. (Compare: byte.)
Usage: This term is used in networking (especially in OSI
standards) in preference to "byte", because some systems use
"byte" for data storage units of a size other than eight bits.
$ OFB
(N) See: output feedback.
$ off-line attack
(I) See: secondary definition under "attack".
$ ohnosecond
(D) That minuscule fraction of time in which you realize that your
private key has been compromised.
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is a joke for
English speakers. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
Shirey Informational [Page 204]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ OID
(N) See: object identifier.
$ Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP)
(I) An Internet protocol [R2560] used by a client to obtain from a
server the validity status and other information about a digital
certificate. (Mentioned in [X509] but not specified there.)
Tutorial: In some applications, such as those involving high-value
commercial transactions, it may be necessary either (a) to obtain
certificate revocation status that is timelier than is possible
with CRLs or (b) to obtain other kinds of status information. OCSP
may be used to determine the current revocation status of a
digital certificate, in lieu of or as a supplement to checking
against a periodic CRL. An OCSP client issues a status request to
an OCSP server and suspends acceptance of the certificate in
question until the server provides a response.
$ one-time pad
1. (N) A manual encryption system in the form of a paper pad for
one-time use.
2. (I) An encryption algorithm in which the key is a random
sequence of symbols and each symbol is used for encryption only
one time -- i.e., used to encrypt only one plaintext symbol and
thus produce only one ciphertext symbol -- and a copy of the key
is used similarly for decryption.
Tutorial: To ensure one-time use, the copy of the key used for
encryption is destroyed after use, as is the copy used for
decryption. This is the only encryption algorithm that is truly
unbreakable, even given unlimited resources for cryptanalysis
[Schn], but key management costs and synchronization problems make
it impractical except in special situations.
$ one-time password, One-Time Password (OTP)
1. (I) /not capitalized/ A "one-time password" is a simple
authentication technique in which each password is used only once
as authentication information that verifies an identity. This
technique counters the threat of a replay attack that uses
passwords captured by wiretapping.
2. (I) /capitalized/ "One-Time Password" is an Internet protocol
[R2289] that is based on S/KEY and uses a cryptographic hash
function to generate one-time passwords for use as authentication
information in system login and in other processes that need
protection against replay attacks.
Shirey Informational [Page 205]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ one-way encryption
(I) Irreversible transformation of plain text to cipher text, such
that the plain text cannot be recovered from the cipher text by
other than exhaustive procedures even if the cryptographic key is
known. (See: brute force, encryption.)
$ one-way function
(I) "A (mathematical) function, f, [that] is easy to compute, but
which for a general value y in the range, it is computationally
difficult to find a value x in the domain such that f(x) = y.
There may be a few values of y for which finding x is not
computationally difficult." [X509]
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"cryptographic hash".
$ onion routing
(I) A system that can be used to provide both (a) data
confidentiality and (b) traffic-flow confidentiality for network
packets, and also provide (c) anonymity for the source of the
packets.
Tutorial: The source, instead of sending a packet directly to the
intended destination, sends it to an "onion routing proxy" that
builds an anonymous connection through several other "onion
routers" to the destination. The proxy defines a route through the
"onion routing network" by encapsulating the original payload in a
layered data packet called an "onion", in which each layer defines
the next hop in the route and each layer is also encrypted. Along
the route, each onion router that receives the onion peels off one
layer; decrypts that layer and reads from it the address of the
next onion router on the route; pads the remaining onion to some
constant size; and sends the padded onion to that next router.
$ open security environment
(O) /U.S. DoD/ A system environment that meets at least one of the
following two conditions: (a) Application developers (including
maintainers) do not have sufficient clearance or authorization to
provide an acceptable presumption that they have not introduced
malicious logic. (b) Configuration control does not provide
sufficient assurance that applications and the equipment are
protected against the introduction of malicious logic prior to and
during the operation of system applications. [NCS04] (See: "first
law" under "Courtney's laws". Compare: closed security
environment.)
Shirey Informational [Page 206]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ open storage
(N) /U.S. Government/ "Storage of classified information within an
accredited facility, but not in General Services Administration
approved secure containers, while the facility is unoccupied by
authorized personnel." [C4009]
$ Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) Reference Model (OSIRM)
(N) A joint ISO/ITU-T standard [I7498-1] for a seven-layer,
architectural communication framework for interconnection of
computers in networks. (See: OSIRM Security Architecture. Compare:
Internet Protocol Suite.)
Tutorial: OSIRM-based standards include communication protocols
that are mostly incompatible with the IPS, but also include
security models, such as X.509, that are used in the Internet.
The OSIRM layers, from highest to lowest, are (7) Application, (6)
Presentation, (5) Session, (4) Transport, (3) Network, (2) Data
Link, and (1) Physical.
Usage: This Glossary refers to OSIRM layers by number to avoid
confusing them with IPS layers, which are referred to by name.
Some unknown person described how the OSIRM layers correspond to
the seven deadly sins:
7. Wrath: Application is always angry with the mess it sees below
itself. (Hey! Who is it to be pointing fingers?)
6. Sloth: Presentation is too lazy to do anything productive by
itself.
5. Lust: Session is always craving and demanding what truly
belongs to Application's functionality.
4. Avarice: Transport wants all of the end-to-end functionality.
(Of course, it deserves it, but life isn't fair.)
3. Gluttony: (Connection-Oriented) Network is overweight and
overbearing after trying too often to eat Transport's lunch.
2. Envy: Poor Data Link is always starved for attention. (With
Asynchronous Transfer Mode, maybe now it is feeling less
neglected.)
1. Pride: Physical has managed to avoid much of the controversy,
and nearly all of the embarrassment, suffered by the others.
John G. Fletcher described how the OSIRM layers correspond to Snow
White's dwarf friends:
7. Doc: Application acts as if it is in charge, but sometimes
muddles its syntax.
Shirey Informational [Page 207]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
6. Sleepy: Presentation is indolent, being guilty of the sin of
Sloth.
5. Dopey: Session is confused because its charter is not very
clear.
4. Grumpy: Transport is irritated because Network has encroached
on Transport's turf.
3. Happy: Network smiles for the same reason that Transport is
irritated.
2. Sneezy: Data Link makes loud noises in the hope of attracting
attention.
1. Bashful: Physical quietly does its work, unnoticed by the
others.
$ operational integrity
(I) Synonym for "system integrity"; this synonym emphasizes the
actual performance of system functions rather than just the
ability to perform them.
$ operational security
1. (I) System capabilities, or performance of system functions,
that are needed either (a) to securely manage a system or (b) to
manage security features of a system. (Compare: operations
security (OPSEC).)
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition because
(a) the definition provided here is general and vague and (b) the
term could easily be confused with "operations security", which is
a different concept.
Tutorial: For example, in the context of an Internet service
provider, the term could refer to capabilities to manage network
devices in the event of attacks, simplify troubleshooting, keep
track of events that affect system integrity, help analyze sources
of attacks, and provide administrators with control over network
addresses and protocols to help mitigate the most common attacks
and exploits. [R3871]
2. (D) Synonym for "administrative security".
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym
for "administrative security". Any type of security may affect
system operations; therefore, the term may be misleading. Instead,
use "administrative security", "communication security", "computer
security", "emanations security", "personnel security", "physical
security", or whatever specific type is meant. (See: security
architecture. Compare: operational integrity, OPSEC.)
Shirey Informational [Page 208]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ operations security (OPSEC)
(I) A process to identify, control, and protect evidence of the
planning and execution of sensitive activities and operations, and
thereby prevent potential adversaries from gaining knowledge of
capabilities and intentions. (See: communications cover. Compare:
operational security.)
$ operator
(I) A person who has been authorized to direct selected functions
of a system. (Compare: manager, user.)
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it
because a system operator may or may not be treated as a "user".
$ OPSEC
1. (I) Abbreviation for "operations security".
2. (D) Abbreviation for "operational security".
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this abbreviation for
"operational security" (as defined in this Glossary), because its
use for "operations security" has been well established for many
years, particular in the military community.
$ ORA
See: organizational registration authority.
$ Orange Book
(D) /slang/ Synonym for "Trusted Computer System Evaluation
Criteria" [CSC1, DoD1].
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria" [CSC1, DoD1].
Instead, use the full, proper name of the document or, in
subsequent references, the abbreviation "TCSEC". (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ organizational certificate
1. (I) An X.509 public-key certificate in which the "subject"
field contains the name of an institution or set (e.g., a
business, government, school, labor union, club, ethnic group,
nationality, system, or group of individuals playing the same
role), rather than the name of an individual person or device.
(Compare: persona certificate, role certificate.)
Tutorial: Such a certificate might be issued for one of the
following purposes:
Shirey Informational [Page 209]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- To enable an individual to prove membership in the
organization.
- To enable an individual to represent the organization, i.e., to
act in its name and with its powers or permissions.
2. (O) /MISSI/ A type of MISSI X.509 public-key certificate that
is issued to support organizational message handling for the U.S.
DoD's Defense Message System.
$ organizational registration authority (ORA)
1. (I) /PKI/ An RA for an organization.
2. (O) /MISSI/ An end entity that (a) assists a PCA, CA, or SCA to
register other end entities, by gathering, verifying, and entering
data and forwarding it to the signing authority and (b) may also
assist with card management functions. An ORA is a local
administrative authority, and the term refers both to the role and
to the person who plays that role. An ORA does not sign
certificates, CRLs, or CKLs. (See: no-PIN ORA, SSO-PIN ORA, user-
PIN ORA.)
$ origin authentication
(D) Synonym for "data origin authentication". (See:
authentication, data origin authentication.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it suggests
careless use of the internationally standardized term "data origin
authentication" and also could be confused with "peer entity
authentication."
$ origin authenticity
(D) Synonym for "data origin authentication". (See: authenticity,
data origin authentication.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it suggests
careless use of the internationally standardized term "data origin
authentication" and mixes concepts in a potentially misleading
way.
$ OSI, OSIRM
(N) See: Open Systems Interconnection Reference Model.
$ OSIRM Security Architecture
(N) The part of the OSIRM [I7498-2] that specifies the security
services and security mechanisms that can be applied to protect
communications between two systems. (See: security architecture.)
Shirey Informational [Page 210]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: This part of the OSIRM includes an allocation of
security services to protocol layers. The following table shows
which security services (see definitions in this Glossary) are
permitted by the OSIRM in each of its layers. (Also, an
application process that operates above the Application Layer may
itself provide security services.) Similarly, the table suggests
which services are suitable for each IPS layer. However,
explaining and justifying these allocations is beyond the scope of
this Glossary.
Legend for Table Entries:
O = Yes, [I7498-2] permits the service in this OSIRM layer.
I = Yes, the service can be incorporated in this IPS layer.
* = This layer subsumed by Application Layer in IPS.
IPS Protocol Layers +-----------------------------------------+
|Network| Net |In-| Trans | Application |
| H/W |Inter|ter| -port | |
| |-face|net| | |
OSIRM Protocol Layers +-----------------------------------------+
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Confidentiality +-----------------------------------------+
- Datagram | O I | O I | O I | O I | | O * | O I |
- Selective Field | | | I | | | O * | O I |
- Traffic Flow | O | | O | | | | O |
-- Full | I | | | | | | |
-- Partial | | I | I | | | | I |
Integrity +-----------------------------------------+
- Datagram | I | I | O I | O I | | | O I |
- Selective Field | | | I | | | | O I |
- Stream | | | O I | O I | | | O I |
Authentication +-----------------------------------------+
- Peer Entity | | I | O I | O I | | | O I |
- Data Origin | | I | O I | O I | | | O I |
Access Control +-----------------------------------------+
- type as appropriate | | I | O I | O I | | | O I |
Non-Repudiation +-----------------------------------------+
- of Origin | | | | | | | O I |
- of Receipt | | | | | | | O I |
+-----------------------------------------+
$ OTAR
(N) See: over-the-air rekeying.
$ OTP
(I) See: One-Time Password.
Shirey Informational [Page 211]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ out-of-band
(I) /adjective, adverb/ Information transfer using a channel or
method that is outside (i.e., separate from or different from) the
main channel or normal method.
Tutorial: Out-of-band mechanisms are often used to distribute
shared secrets (e.g., a symmetric key) or other sensitive
information items (e.g., a root key) that are needed to initialize
or otherwise enable the operation of cryptography or other
security mechanisms. Example: Using postal mail to distribute
printed or magnetic media containing symmetric cryptographic keys
for use in Internet encryption devices. (See: key distribution.)
$ output feedback (OFB)
(N) A block cipher mode that modifies ECB mode to operate on
plaintext segments of variable length less than or equal to the
block length. [FP081] (See: block cipher, [SP38A].)
Tutorial: This mode operates by directly using the algorithm's
previously generated output block as the algorithm's next input
block (i.e., by "feeding back" the output block) and combining
(exclusive OR-ing) the output block with the next plaintext
segment (of block length or less) to form the next ciphertext
segment.
$ outside attack
(I) See: secondary definition under "attack". Compare: outsider.)
$ outsider
(I) A user (usually a person) that accesses a system from a
position that is outside the system's security perimeter.
(Compare: authorized user, insider, unauthorized user.)
Tutorial: The actions performed by an outsider in accessing the
system may be either authorized or unauthorized; i.e., an outsider
may act either as an authorized user or as an unauthorized user.
$ over-the-air rekeying (OTAR)
(N) Changing a key in a remote cryptographic device by sending a
new key directly to the device via a channel that the device is
protecting. [C4009]
$ overload
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "obstruction".
$ P1363
(N) See: IEEE P1363.
Shirey Informational [Page 212]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ PAA
(O) See: policy approving authority.
$ package
(N) /Common Criteria/ A reusable set of either functional or
assurance components, combined in a single unit to satisfy a set
of identified security objectives. (Compare: protection profile.)
Example: The seven EALs defined in Part 3 of the Common Criteria
are predefined assurance packages.
Tutorial: A package is a combination of security requirement
components and is intended to be reusable in the construction of
either more complex packages or protection profiles and security
targets. A package expresses a set of either functional or
assurance requirements that meet some particular need, expressed
as a set of security objectives.
$ packet
(I) A block of data that is carried from a source to a destination
through a communication channel or, more generally, across a
network. (Compare: datagram, PDU.)
$ packet filter
(I) See: secondary definition under "filtering router".
$ packet monkey
(D) /slang/ Someone who floods a system with packets, creating a
denial-of-service condition for the system's users. (See:
cracker.)
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ pagejacking
(D) /slang/ A contraction of "Web page hijacking". A masquerade
attack in which the attacker copies (steals) a home page or other
material from the target server, rehosts the page on a server the
attacker controls, and causes the rehosted page to be indexed by
the major Web search services, thereby diverting browsers from the
target server to the attacker's server.
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this contraction. The term
is not listed in most dictionaries and could confuse international
readers. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
Shirey Informational [Page 213]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ PAN
(O) See: primary account number.
$ PAP
(I) See: Password Authentication Protocol.
$ parity bit
(I) A checksum that is computed on a block of bits by computing
the binary sum of the individual bits in the block and then
discarding all but the low-order bit of the sum. (See: checksum.)
$ partitioned security mode
(N) A mode of system operation wherein all users having access to
the system have the necessary security clearances for all data
handled by the system, but some users might not have either formal
access approval or need-to-know for all the data. (See: /system
operation/ under "mode", formal access approval, need to know,
protection level, security clearance.)
Usage: Usually abbreviated as "partitioned mode". This term was
defined in U.S. Government policy on system accreditation.
$ PASS
(N) See: personnel authentication system string.
$ passive attack
(I) See: secondary definition under "attack".
$ passive user
(I) See: secondary definition under "system user".
$ passive wiretapping
(I) A wiretapping attack that attempts only to observe a
communication flow and gain knowledge of the data it contains, but
does not alter or otherwise affect that flow. (See: wiretapping.
Compare: passive attack, active wiretapping.)
$ password
1a. (I) A secret data value, usually a character string, that is
presented to a system by a user to authenticate the user's
identity. (See: authentication information, challenge-response,
PIN, simple authentication.)
1b. (O) "A character string used to authenticate an identity."
[CSC2]
Shirey Informational [Page 214]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
1c. (O) "A string of characters (letters, numbers, and other
symbols) used to authenticate an identity or to verify access
authorization." [FP140]
1d. (O) "A secret that a claimant memorizes and uses to
authenticate his or her identity. Passwords are typically
character strings." [SP63]
Tutorial: A password is usually paired with a user identifier that
is explicit in the authentication process, although in some cases
the identifier may be implicit. A password is usually verified by
matching it to a stored value held by the access control system
for that identifier.
Using a password as authentication information is based on
assuming that the password is known only by the system entity for
which the identity is being authenticated. Therefore, in a network
environment where wiretapping is possible, simple authentication
that relies on transmission of static (i.e., repetitively used)
passwords in cleartext form is inadequate. (See: one-time
password, strong authentication.)
$ Password Authentication Protocol (PAP)
(I) A simple authentication mechanism in PPP. In PAP, a user
identifier and password are transmitted in cleartext form. [R1334]
(See: CHAP.)
$ password sniffing
(D) /slang/ Passive wiretapping to gain knowledge of passwords.
(See: Deprecated Usage under "sniffing".)
$ path discovery
(I) For a digital certificate, the process of finding a set of
public-key certificates that comprise a certification path from a
trusted key to that specific certificate.
$ path validation
(I) The process of validating (a) all of the digital certificates
in a certification path and (b) the required relationships between
those certificates, thus validating the contents of the last
certificate on the path. (See: certificate validation.)
Tutorial: To promote interoperable PKI applications in the
Internet, RFC 3280 specifies a detailed algorithm for validation
of a certification path.
Shirey Informational [Page 215]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ payment card
(N) /SET/ Collectively refers "to credit cards, debit cards,
charge cards, and bank cards issued by a financial institution and
which reflects a relationship between the cardholder and the
financial institution." [SET2]
$ payment gateway
(O) /SET/ A system operated by an acquirer, or a third party
designated by an acquirer, to provide electronic commerce services
to the merchants in support of the acquirer, and which interfaces
to the acquirer to support the authorization, capture, and
processing of merchant payment messages, including payment
instructions from cardholders. [SET1, SET2]
$ payment gateway certification authority (SET PCA)
(O) /SET/ A CA that issues digital certificates to payment
gateways and is operated on behalf of a payment card brand, an
acquirer, or another party according to brand rules. A SET PCA
issues a CRL for compromised payment gateway certificates. [SET2]
(See: PCA.)
$ PC card
(N) A type of credit card-sized, plug-in peripheral device that
was originally developed to provide memory expansion for portable
computers, but is also used for other kinds of functional
expansion. (See: FORTEZZA, PCMCIA.)
Tutorial: The international PC Card Standard defines a non-
proprietary form factor in three sizes -- Types I, II, and III --
each of which have a 68-pin interface between the card and the
socket into which it plugs. All three types have the same length
and width, roughly the size of a credit card, but differ in their
thickness from 3.3 to 10.5 mm. Examples include storage modules,
modems, device interface adapters, and cryptographic modules.
$ PCA
(D) Abbreviation of various kinds of "certification authority".
(See: Internet policy certification authority, (MISSI) policy
creation authority, (SET) payment gateway certification
authority.)
Deprecated Usage: An IDOC that uses this abbreviation SHOULD
define it at the point of first use.
$ PCI
(N) See: "protocol control information" under "protocol data
unit".
Shirey Informational [Page 216]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ PCMCIA
(N) Personal Computer Memory Card International Association, a
group of manufacturers, developers, and vendors, founded in 1989
to standardize plug-in peripheral memory cards for personal
computers and now extended to deal with any technology that works
in the PC Card form factor. (See: PC card.)
$ PDS
(N) See: protective distribution system.
$ PDU
(N) See: protocol data unit.
$ peer entity authentication
(I) "The corroboration that a peer entity in an association is the
one claimed." [I7498-2] (See: authentication.)
$ peer entity authentication service
(I) A security service that verifies an identity claimed by or for
a system entity in an association. (See: authentication,
authentication service.)
Tutorial: This service is used at the establishment of, or at
times during, an association to confirm the identity of one entity
to another, thus protecting against a masquerade by the first
entity. However, unlike data origin authentication service, this
service requires an association to exist between the two entities,
and the corroboration provided by the service is valid only at the
current time that the service is provided. (See: "relationship
between data integrity service and authentication services" under
"data integrity service").
$ PEM
(I) See: Privacy Enhanced Mail.
$ penetrate
1a. (I) Circumvent a system's security protections. (See: attack,
break, violation.)
1b. (I) Successfully and repeatedly gain unauthorized access to a
protected system resource. [Huff]
$ penetration
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "intrusion".
Shirey Informational [Page 217]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ penetration test
(I) A system test, often part of system certification, in which
evaluators attempt to circumvent the security features of a
system. [NCS04, SP42] (See: tiger team.)
Tutorial: Penetration testing evaluates the relative vulnerability
of a system to attacks and identifies methods of gaining access to
a system by using tools and techniques that are available to
adversaries. Testing may be performed under various constraints
and conditions, including a specified level of knowledge of the
system design and implementation. For a TCSEC evaluation, testers
are assumed to have all system design and implementation
documentation, including source code, manuals, and circuit
diagrams, and to work under no greater constraints than those
applied to ordinary users.
$ perfect forward secrecy
(I) For a key agreement protocol, the property that compromises
long-term keying material does not compromise session keys that
were previously derived from the long-term material. (Compare:
public-key forward secrecy.)
Usage: Some existing RFCs use this term but either do not define
it or do not define it precisely. While preparing this Glossary,
we found this to be a muddled area. Experts did not agree. For all
practical purposes, the literature defines "perfect forward
secrecy" by stating the Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm. The term
"public-key forward secrecy" (suggested by Hilarie Orman) and the
definition stated for it in this Glossary were crafted to be
compatible with current Internet documents, yet be narrow and
leave room for improved terminology.
Challenge to the Internet security community: We need a taxonomy
of terms and definitions to cover the basic properties discussed
here for the full range of cryptographic algorithms and protocols
used in Internet Standards:
Involvement of session keys vs. long-term keys: Experts disagree
about the basic ideas involved:
- One concept of "forward secrecy" is that, given observations of
the operation of a key establishment protocol up to time t, and
given some of the session keys derived from those protocol
runs, you cannot derive unknown past session keys or future
session keys.
- A related property is that, given observations of the protocol
and knowledge of the derived session keys, you cannot derive
one or more of the long-term private keys.
Shirey Informational [Page 218]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- The "I" definition presented above involves a third concept of
"forward secrecy" that refers to the effect of the compromise
of long-term keys.
- All three concepts involve the idea that a compromise of "this"
encryption key is not supposed to compromise the "next" one.
There also is the idea that compromise of a single key will
compromise only the data protected by the single key. In
Internet literature, the focus has been on protection against
decryption of back traffic in the event of a compromise of
secret key material held by one or both parties to a
communication.
Forward vs. backward: Experts are unhappy with the word "forward",
because compromise of "this" encryption key also is not supposed
to compromise the "previous" one, which is "backward" rather than
forward. In S/KEY, if the key used at time t is compromised, then
all keys used prior to that are compromised. If the "long-term"
key (i.e., the base of the hashing scheme) is compromised, then
all keys past and future are compromised; thus, you could say that
S/KEY has neither forward nor backward secrecy.
Asymmetric cryptography vs. symmetric: Experts disagree about
forward secrecy in the context of symmetric cryptographic systems.
In the absence of asymmetric cryptography, compromise of any long-
term key seems to compromise any session key derived from the
long-term key. For example, Kerberos isn't forward secret, because
compromising a client's password (thus compromising the key shared
by the client and the authentication server) compromises future
session keys shared by the client and the ticket-granting server.
Ordinary forward secrecy vs. "perfect" forward secret: Experts
disagree about the difference between these two. Some say there is
no difference, and some say that the initial naming was
unfortunate and suggest dropping the word "perfect". Some suggest
using "forward secrecy" for the case where one long-term private
key is compromised, and adding "perfect" for when both private
keys (or, when the protocol is multi-party, all private keys) are
compromised.
Acknowledgements: Bill Burr, Burt Kaliski, Steve Kent, Paul Van
Oorschot, Jonathan Trostle, Michael Wiener, and, especially,
Hilarie Orman contributed ideas to this discussion.
$ perimeter
See: security perimeter.
Shirey Informational [Page 219]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ periods processing
(I) A mode of system operation in which information of different
sensitivities is processed at distinctly different times by the
same system, with the system being properly purged or sanitized
between periods. (See: color change.)
Tutorial: The security mode of operation and maximum
classification of data handled by the system is established for an
interval of time and then is changed for the following interval of
time. A period extends from the secure initialization of the
system to the completion of any purging of sensitive data handled
by the system during the period.
$ permanent storage
(I) Non-volatile media that, once written into, can never be
completely erased.
$ permission
1a. (I) Synonym for "authorization". (Compare: privilege.)
1b. (N) An authorization or set of authorizations to perform
security-relevant functions in the context of role-based access
control. [ANSI]
Tutorial: A permission is a positively stated authorization for
access that (a) can be associated with one or more roles and (b)
enables a user in a role to access a specified set of system
resources by causing a specific set of system actions to be
performed on the resources.
$ persona certificate
(I) An X.509 certificate issued to a system entity that wishes to
use a persona to conceal its true identity when using PEM or other
Internet services that depend on PKI support. (See: anonymity.)
[R1422]
Tutorial: PEM designers intended that (a) a CA issuing persona
certificates would explicitly not be vouching for the identity of
the system entity to whom the certificate is issued, (b) such
certificates would be issued only by CAs subordinate to a policy
CA having a policy stating that purpose (i.e., that would warn
relying parties that the "subject" field DN represented only a
persona and not a true, vetted user identity), and (c) the CA
would not need to maintain records binding the true identity of
the subject to the certificate.
Shirey Informational [Page 220]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
However, the PEM designers also intended that a CA issuing persona
certificates would establish procedures (d) to enable "the holder
of a PERSONA certificate to request that his certificate be
revoked" and (e) to ensure that it did not issue the same subject
DN to multiple users. The latter condition implies that a persona
certificate is not an organizational certificate unless the
organization has just one member or representative.
$ personal identification number (PIN)
1a. (I) A character string used as a password to gain access to a
system resource. (See: authentication information.)
Example: A cryptographic token typically requires its user to
enter a PIN in order to access information stored in the token and
invoke the token's cryptographic functions.
1b. (O) An alphanumeric code or password used to authenticate an
identity.
Tutorial: Despite the words "identification" and "number", a PIN
seldom serves as a user identifier, and a PIN's characters are not
necessarily all numeric. Retail banking applications use 4-digit
numeric user PINs, but the FORTEZZA PC card uses 12-character
alphanumeric SSO PINs. (See: SSO PIN, user PIN.)
A better name for this concept would have been "personnel
authentication system string" (PASS), in which case, an
alphanumeric character string for this purpose would have been
called, obviously, a "PASSword".
$ personal information
(I) Information about a particular person, especially information
of an intimate or critical nature, that could cause harm or pain
to that person if disclosed to unauthorized parties. Examples:
medical record, arrest record, credit report, academic transcript,
training report, job application, credit card number, Social
Security number. (See: privacy.)
$ personality
1. (I) Synonym for "principal".
2. (O) /MISSI/ A set of MISSI X.509 public-key certificates that
have the same subject DN, together with their associated private
keys and usage specifications, that is stored on a FORTEZZA PC
card to support a role played by the card's user.
Tutorial: When a card's user selects a personality to use in a
FORTEZZA-aware application, the data determines behavior traits
Shirey Informational [Page 221]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
(the personality) of the application. A card's user may have
multiple personalities on the card. Each has a "personality
label", a user-friendly character string that applications can
display to the user for selecting or changing the personality to
be used. For example, a military user's card might contain three
personalities: GENERAL HALFTRACK, COMMANDER FORT SWAMPY, and NEW
YEAR'S EVE PARTY CHAIRMAN. Each personality includes one or more
certificates of different types (such as DSA versus RSA), for
different purposes (such as digital signature versus encryption),
or with different authorizations.
$ personnel authentication system string (PASS)
(N) See: Tutorial under "personal identification number".
$ personnel security
(I) Procedures to ensure that persons who access a system have
proper clearance, authorization, and need-to-know as required by
the system's security policy. (See: security architecture.)
$ PGP(trademark)
(O) See: Pretty Good Privacy(trademark).
$ phase 1 negotiation
$ phase 2 negotiation
(I) /ISAKMP/ See: secondary definition under "Internet Security
Association and Key Management Protocol".
$ phishing
(D) /slang/ A technique for attempting to acquire sensitive data,
such as bank account numbers, through a fraudulent solicitation in
email or on a Web site, in which the perpetrator masquerades as a
legitimate business or reputable person. (See: social
engineering.)
Derivation: Possibly from "phony fishing"; the solicitation
usually involves some kind of lure or bait to hook unwary
recipients. (Compare: phreaking.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is not listed
in most dictionaries and could confuse international readers.
(See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
$ Photuris
(I) A UDP-based, key establishment protocol for session keys,
designed for use with the IPsec protocols AH and ESP. Superseded
by IKE.
Shirey Informational [Page 222]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ phreaking
(D) A contraction of "telephone breaking". An attack on or
penetration of a telephone system or, by extension, any other
communication or information system. [Raym]
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this contraction; it is not
listed in most dictionaries and could confuse international
readers. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
$ physical destruction
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under
"incapacitation".
$ physical security
(I) Tangible means of preventing unauthorized physical access to a
system. Examples: Fences, walls, and other barriers; locks, safes,
and vaults; dogs and armed guards; sensors and alarm bells.
[FP031, R1455] (See: security architecture.)
$ piggyback attack
(I) A form of active wiretapping in which the attacker gains
access to a system via intervals of inactivity in another user's
legitimate communication connection. Sometimes called a "between-
the-lines" attack. (See: hijack attack, man-in-the-middle attack.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the term could confuse international
readers.
$ PIN
(I) See: personal identification number.
$ ping of death
(D) A denial-of-service attack that sends an improperly large ICMP
echo request packet (a "ping") with the intent of causing the
destination system to fail. (See: ping sweep, teardrop.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; instead, use
"ping packet overflow attack" or some other term that is specific
with regard to the attack mechanism.
Tutorial: This attack seeks to exploit an implementation
vulnerability. The IP specification requires hosts to be prepared
to accept datagrams of up to 576 octets, but also permits IP
datagrams to be up to 65,535 octets long. If an IP implementation
does not properly handle very long IP packets, the ping packet may
overflow the input buffer and cause a fatal system error.
Shirey Informational [Page 223]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ ping sweep
(I) An attack that sends ICMP echo requests ("pings") to a range
of IP addresses, with the goal of finding hosts that can be probed
for vulnerabilities. (See: ping of death. Compare: port scan.)
$ PKCS
(N) See: Public-Key Cryptography Standards.
$ PKCS #5
(N) A standard [PKC05] (see: RFC 2898) from the PKCS series;
defines a method for encrypting an octet string with a secret key
derived from a password.
Tutorial: Although the method can be used for arbitrary octet
strings, its intended primary application in public-key
cryptography is for encrypting private keys when transferring them
from one computer system to another, as described in PKCS #8.
$ PKCS #7
(N) A standard [PKC07] (see: RFC 2315) from the PKCS series;
defines a syntax for data that may have cryptography applied to
it, such as for digital signatures and digital envelopes. (See:
CMS.)
$ PKCS #10
(N) A standard [PKC10] (see: RFC 2986) from the PKCS series;
defines a syntax for certification requests. (See: certification
request.)
Tutorial: A PKCS #10 request contains a DN and a public key, and
may contain other attributes, and is signed by the entity making
the request. The request is sent to a CA, who converts it to an
X.509 public-key certificate (or some other form), and returns it,
possibly in PKCS #7 format.
$ PKCS #11
(N) A standard [PKC11] from the PKCS series; defines CAPI called
"Cryptoki" for devices that hold cryptographic information and
perform cryptographic functions.
$ PKI
(I) See: public-key infrastructure.
$ PKINIT
(I) Abbreviation for "Public Key Cryptography for Initial
Authentication in Kerberos" (RFC 4556). (See: Tutorial under
"Kerberos".)
Shirey Informational [Page 224]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ PKIX
1a. (I) A contraction of "Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)", the
name of the IETF working group that is specifying an architecture
[R3280] and set of protocols [R4210] to provide X.509-based PKI
services for the Internet.
1b. (I) A collective name for that Internet PKI architecture and
associated set of protocols.
Tutorial: The goal of PKIX is to facilitate the use of X.509
public-key certificates in multiple Internet applications and to
promote interoperability between different implementations that
use those certificates. The resulting PKI is intended to provide a
framework that supports a range of trust and hierarchy
environments and a range of usage environments. PKIX specifies (a)
profiles of the v3 X.509 public-key certificate standards and the
v2 X.509 CRL standards for the Internet, (b) operational protocols
used by relying parties to obtain information such as certificates
or certificate status, (c) management protocols used by system
entities to exchange information needed for proper management of
the PKI, and (d) information about certificate policies and CPSs,
covering the areas of PKI security not directly addressed in the
rest of PKIX.
$ plain text
1. (I) /noun/ Data that is input to an encryption process. (See:
plaintext. Compare: cipher text, clear text.)
2. (D) /noun/ Synonym for "clear text".
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym
for "clear text". Sometimes plain text that is input to an
encryption operation is clear text, but other times plain text is
cipher text that was output from a previous encryption operation.
(See: superencryption.)
$ plaintext
1. (O) /noun/ Synonym for "plain text".
2. (I) /adjective/ Referring to plain text. Usage: Commonly used
instead of "plain-text". (Compare: ciphertext, cleartext.)
3. (D) /noun/ Synonym for "cleartext".
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym
for "cleartext". Cleartext data is, by definition, not encrypted;
but plaintext data that is input to an encryption operation may be
Shirey Informational [Page 225]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
cleartext data or may be ciphertext data that was output from a
previous encryption operation. (See: superencryption.)
$ PLI
(I) See: Private Line Interface.
$ PMA
(N) See: policy management authority.
$ Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)
(I) An Internet Standard protocol (RFC 1661) for encapsulation and
full-duplex transportation of protocol data packets in OSIRM Layer
3 over an OSIRM Layer 2 link between two peers, and for
multiplexing different Layer 3 protocols over the same link.
Includes optional negotiation to select and use a peer entity
authentication protocol to authenticate the peers to each other
before they exchange Layer 3 data. (See: CHAP, EAP, PAP.)
$ Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP)
(I) An Internet client-server protocol (RFC 2637) (originally
developed by Ascend and Microsoft) that enables a dial-up user to
create a virtual extension of the dial-up link across a network by
tunneling PPP over IP. (See: L2TP.)
Tutorial: PPP can encapsulate any IPS Network Interface Layer
protocol or OSIRM Layer 3 protocol. Therefore, PPTP does not
specify security services; it depends on protocols above and below
it to provide any needed security. PPTP makes it possible to
divorce the location of the initial dial-up server (i.e., the PPTP
Access Concentrator, the client, which runs on a special-purpose
host) from the location at which the dial-up protocol (PPP)
connection is terminated and access to the network is provided
(i.e., at the PPTP Network Server, which runs on a general-purpose
host).
$ policy
1a. (I) A plan or course of action that is stated for a system or
organization and is intended to affect and direct the decisions
and deeds of that entity's components or members. (See: security
policy.)
1b. (O) A definite goal, course, or method of action to guide and
determine present and future decisions, that is implemented or
executed within a particular context, such as within a business
unit. [R3198]
Deprecated Abbreviation: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use "policy" as an
abbreviation of either "security policy" or "certificate policy".
Shirey Informational [Page 226]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Instead, to avoid misunderstanding, use a fully qualified term, at
least at the point of first usage.
Tutorial: The introduction of new technology to replace
traditional systems can result in new systems being deployed
without adequate policy definition and before the implications of
the new technology are fully understand. In some cases, it can be
difficult to establish policies for new technology before the
technology has been operationally tested and evaluated. Thus,
policy changes tend to lag behind technological changes, such that
either old policies impede the technical innovation, or the new
technology is deployed without adequate policies to govern its
use.
When new technology changes the ways that things are done, new
"procedures" must be defined to establish operational guidelines
for using the technology and achieving satisfactory results, and
new "practices" must be established for managing new systems and
monitoring results. Practices and procedures are more directly
coupled to actual systems and business operations than are
polices, which tend to be more abstract.
- "Practices" define how a system is to be managed and what
controls are in place to monitor the system and detect abnormal
behavior or quality problems. Practices are established to
ensure that a system is managed in compliance with stated
policies. System audits are primarily concerned with whether or
not practices are being followed. Auditors evaluate the
controls to make sure they conform to accepted industry
standards, and then confirm that controls are in place and that
control measurements are being gathered. Audit trails are
examples of control measurements that are recorded as part of
system operations.
- "Procedures" define how a system is operated, and relate
closely to issues of what technology is used, who the operators
are, and how the system is deployed physically. Procedures
define both normal and abnormal operating circumstances.
- For every control defined by a practice statement, there should
be corresponding procedures to implement the control and
provide ongoing measurement of the control parameters.
Conversely, procedures require management practices to insure
consistent and correct operational behavior.
$ policy approval authority
(D) /PKI/ Synonym for "policy management authority". [PAG]
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as synonym for
"policy management authority". The term suggests a limited,
passive role that is not typical of PMAs.
Shirey Informational [Page 227]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ policy approving authority (PAA)
(O) /MISSI/ The top-level signing authority of a MISSI
certification hierarchy. The term refers both to that
authoritative office or role and to the person who plays that
role. (See: policy management authority, root registry.)
Tutorial: A MISSI PAA (a) registers MISSI PCAs and signs their
X.509 public-key certificates, (b) issues CRLs but does not issue
a CKL, and (c) may issue cross-certificates to other PAAs.
$ policy authority
(D) /PKI/ Synonym for "policy management authority". [PAG]
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as synonym for
"policy management authority". The term is unnecessarily vague and
thus may be confused with other PKI entities, such as CAs and RAs,
that enforce of apply various aspects of PKI policy.
$ policy certification authority (Internet PCA)
(I) An X.509-compliant CA at the second level of the Internet
certification hierarchy, under the IPRA. Each PCA operates under
its published security policy (see: certificate policy, CPS) and
within constraints established by the IPRA for all PCAs. [R1422].
(See: policy creation authority.)
$ policy creation authority (MISSI PCA)
(O) /MISSI/ The second level of a MISSI certification hierarchy;
the administrative root of a security policy domain of MISSI users
and other, subsidiary authorities. The term refers both to that
authoritative office or role and to the person who fills that
office. (See: policy certification authority.)
Tutorial: A MISSI PCA's certificate is issued by a PAA. The PCA
registers the CAs in its domain, defines their configurations, and
issues their X.509 public-key certificates. (The PCA may also
issue certificates for SCAs, ORAs, and other end entities, but a
PCA does not usually do this.) The PCA periodically issues CRLs
and CKLs for its domain.
$ policy management authority (PMA)
(I) /PKI/ A person, role, or organization within a PKI that is
responsible for (a) creating or approving the content of the
certificate policies and CPSs that are used in the PKI; (b)
ensuring the administration of those policies; and (c) approving
any cross-certification or interoperability agreements with CAs
external to the PKI and any related policy mappings. The PMA may
also be the accreditor for the PKI as a whole or for some of its
Shirey Informational [Page 228]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
components or applications. [DoD9, PAG] (See: policy approving
authority.)
Example: In the U.S. Department of Defense, an organization called
the Policy Management Authority is responsible for DoD PKI [DoD9].
$ policy mapping
(I) "Recognizing that, when a CA in one domain certifies a CA in
another domain, a particular certificate policy in the second
domain may be considered by the authority of the first domain to
be equivalent (but not necessarily identical in all respects) to a
particular certificate policy in the first domain." [X509]
$ policy rule
(I) A building block of a security policy; it (a) defines a set of
system conditions and (b) specifies a set of system actions that
are to be performed if those conditions occur. [R3198]
$ POP3
(I) See: Post Office Protocol, version 3.
$ POP3 APOP
(I) A POP3 command (better described as a transaction type, or
subprotocol) by which a POP3 client optionally uses a keyed hash
(based on MD5) to authenticate itself to a POP3 server and,
depending on the server implementation, to protect against replay
attacks. (See: CRAM, POP3 AUTH, IMAP4 AUTHENTICATE.)
Tutorial: The server includes a unique time stamp in its greeting
to the client. The subsequent APOP command sent by the client to
the server contains the client's name and the hash result of
applying MD5 to a string formed from both the time stamp and a
shared secret value that is known only to the client and the
server. APOP was designed to provide an alternative to using
POP3's USER and PASS (i.e., password) command pair, in which the
client sends a cleartext password to the server.
$ POP3 AUTH
(I) A POP3 command [R1734] (better described as a transaction
type, or subprotocol) by which a POP3 client optionally proposes a
mechanism to a POP3 server to authenticate the client to the
server and provide other security services. (See: POP3 APOP, IMAP4
AUTHENTICATE.)
Tutorial: If the server accepts the proposal, the command is
followed by performing a challenge-response authentication
protocol and, optionally, negotiating a protection mechanism for
Shirey Informational [Page 229]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
subsequent POP3 interactions. The security mechanisms used by POP3
AUTH are those used by IMAP4.
$ port scan
(I) A technique that sends client requests to a range of service
port addresses on a host. (See: probe. Compare: ping sweep.)
Tutorial: A port scan can be used for pre-attack surveillance,
with the goal of finding an active port and subsequently
exploiting a known vulnerability of that port's service. A port
scan can also be used as a flooding attack.
$ positive authorization
(I) The principle that a security architecture should be designed
so that access to system resources is permitted only when
explicitly granted; i.e., in the absence of an explicit
authorization that grants access, the default action shall be to
refuse access. (See: authorization, access.)
$ POSIX
(N) Portable Operating System Interface for Computer Environments,
a standard [FP151, I9945] (originally IEEE Standard P1003.1) that
defines an operating system interface and environment to support
application portability at the source code level. It is intended
to be used by both application developers and system implementers.
Tutorial: P1003.1 supports security functionality like that on
most UNIX systems, including discretionary access control and
privileges. IEEE Draft Standard P1003.6 specifies additional
functionality not provided in the base standard, including (a)
discretionary access control, (b) audit trail mechanisms, (c)
privilege mechanisms, (d) mandatory access control, and (e)
information label mechanisms.
$ Post Office Protocol, version 3 (POP3)
(I) An Internet Standard protocol (RFC 1939) by which a client
workstation can dynamically access a mailbox on a server host to
retrieve mail messages that the server has received and is holding
for the client. (See: IMAP4.)
Tutorial: POP3 has mechanisms for optionally authenticating a
client to a server and providing other security services. (See:
POP3 APOP, POP3 AUTH.)
$ PPP
(I) See: Point-to-Point Protocol.
Shirey Informational [Page 230]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ PPTP
(I) See: Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol.
$ preauthorization
(N) /PKI/ A CAW feature that enables certification requests to be
automatically validated against data provided in advance to the CA
by an authorizing entity.
$ precedence
1. (I) /information system/ A ranking assigned to events or data
objects that determines the relative order in which they are
processed.
2. (N) /communication system/ A designation assigned to a
communication (i.e., packet, message, data stream, connection,
etc.) by the originator to state the importance or urgency of that
communication versus other communications, and thus indicate to
the transmission system the relative order of handling, and
indicate to the receiver the order in which the communication is
to be noted. [F1037] (See: availability, critical, preemption.)
Example: The "Precedence" subfield of the "Type of Service" field
of the IPv4 header supports the following designations (in
descending order of importance): 111 Network Control, 110
Internetwork Control, 101 CRITIC/ECP (Critical Intelligence
Communication/Emergency Command Precedence), 100 Flash Override,
011 Flash, 010 Immediate, 001 Priority, and 000 Routine. These
designations were adopted from U.S. DoD systems that existed
before ARPANET.
$ preemption
(N) The seizure, usually automatic, of system resources that are
being used to serve a lower-precedence communication, in order to
serve immediately a higher-precedence communication. [F1037]
$ Pretty Good Privacy(trademark) (PGP(trademark))
(O) Trademarks of Network Associates, Inc., referring to a
computer program (and related protocols) that uses cryptography to
provide data security for electronic mail and other applications
on the Internet. (Compare: DKIM, MOSS, MSP, PEM, S/MIME.)
Tutorial: PGP encrypts messages with a symmetric algorithm
(originally, IDEA in CFB mode), distributes the symmetric keys by
encrypting them with an asymmetric algorithm (originally, RSA),
and creates digital signatures on messages with a cryptographic
hash and an asymmetric encryption algorithm (originally, MD5 and
RSA). To establish ownership of public keys, PGP depends on the
"web of trust".
Shirey Informational [Page 231]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ prevention
(I) See: secondary definition under "security".
$ primary account number (PAN)
(O) /SET/ "The assigned number that identifies the card issuer and
cardholder. This account number is composed of an issuer
identification number, an individual account number
identification, and an accompanying check digit as defined by ISO
7812-1985." [SET2, I7812] (See: bank identification number.)
Tutorial: The PAN is embossed, encoded, or both on a magnetic-
strip-based credit card. The PAN identifies the issuer to which a
transaction is to be routed and the account to which it is to be
applied unless specific instructions indicate otherwise. The
authority that assigns the BIN part of the PAN is the American
Bankers Association.
$ principal
(I) A specific identity claimed by a user when accessing a system.
Usage: Usually understood to be an identity that is registered in
and authenticated by the system; equivalent to the notion of login
account identifier. Each principal is normally assigned to a
single user, but a single user may be assigned (or attempt to use)
more than one principal. Each principal can spawn one or more
subjects, but each subject is associated with only one principal.
(Compare: role, subject, user.)
(I) /Kerberos/ A uniquely identified (i.e., uniquely named) client
or server instance that participates in a network communication.
$ priority
(I) /information system/ Precedence for processing an event or
data object, determined by security importance or other factors.
(See: precedence.)
$ privacy
1. (I) The right of an entity (normally a person), acting in its
own behalf, to determine the degree to which it will interact with
its environment, including the degree to which the entity is
willing to share its personal information with others. (See:
HIPAA, personal information, Privacy Act of 1974. Compare:
anonymity, data confidentiality.) [FP041]
2. (O) "The right of individuals to control or influence what
information related to them may be collected and stored and by
whom and to whom that information may be disclosed." [I7498-2]
Shirey Informational [Page 232]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
3. (D) Synonym for "data confidentiality".
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym
for "data confidentiality" or "data confidentiality service",
which are different concepts. Privacy is a reason for security
rather than a kind of security. For example, a system that stores
personal data needs to protect the data to prevent harm,
embarrassment, inconvenience, or unfairness to any person about
whom data is maintained, and to protect the person's privacy. For
that reason, the system may need to provide data confidentiality
service.
Tutorial: The term "privacy" is used for various separate but
related concepts, including bodily privacy, territorial privacy,
personal information privacy, and communication privacy. IDOCs are
expected to address only communication privacy, which in this
Glossary is defined primarily by "data confidentiality" and
secondarily by "data integrity".
IDOCs are not expected to address information privacy, but this
Glossary provides definition 1 for that concept because personal
information privacy is often confused with communication privacy.
IDOCs are not expected to address bodily privacy or territorial
privacy, and this Glossary does not define those concepts because
they are not easily confused with communication privacy.
$ Privacy Act of 1974
(O) A U.S. Federal law (Section 552a of Title 5, United States
Code) that seeks to balance the U.S. Government's need to maintain
data about individuals with the rights of individuals to be
protected against unwarranted invasions of their privacy stemming
from federal agencies' collection, maintenance, use, and
disclosure of personal data. (See: privacy.)
Tutorial: In 1974, the U.S. Congress was concerned with the
potential for abuses that could arise from the Government's
increasing use of computers to store and retrieve personal data.
Therefore, the Act has four basic policy objectives:
- To restrict disclosure of personally identifiable records
maintained by Federal agencies.
- To grant individuals increased rights of access to Federal
agency records maintained on themselves.
- To grant individuals the right to seek amendment of agency
records maintained on themselves upon a showing that the
records are not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete.
- To establish a code of "fair information practices" that
requires agencies to comply with statutory norms for
collection, maintenance, and dissemination of records.
Shirey Informational [Page 233]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM)
(I) An Internet protocol to provide data confidentiality, data
integrity, and data origin authentication for electronic mail.
[R1421, R1422]. (Compare: DKIM, MOSS, MSP, PGP, S/MIME.)
Tutorial: PEM encrypts messages with a symmetric algorithm
(originally, DES in CBC mode), provides distribution for the
symmetric keys by encrypting them with an asymmetric algorithm
(originally, RSA), and signs messages with an asymmetric
encryption algorithm over a cryptographic hash (originally, RSA
over either MD2 or MD5). To establish ownership of public keys,
PEM uses a certification hierarchy, with X.509 public-key
certificates and X.509 CRLs that are signed with an asymmetric
encryption algorithm over a cryptographic hash (originally, RSA
over MD2).
PEM is designed to be compatible with a wide range of key
management methods, but is limited to specifying security services
only for text messages and, like MOSS, has not been widely
implemented in the Internet.
$ private component
(I) Synonym for "private key".
Deprecated Usage: In most cases, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term;
instead, to avoid confusing readers, use "private key". However,
the term MAY be used when discussing a key pair; e.g., "A key pair
has a public component and a private component."
$ private extension
(I) See: secondary definition under "extension".
$ private key
1. (I) The secret component of a pair of cryptographic keys used
for asymmetric cryptography. (See: key pair, public key, secret
key.)
2. (O) In a public key cryptosystem, "that key of a user's key
pair which is known only by that user." [X509]
$ Private Line Interface (PLI)
(I) The first end-to-end packet encryption system for a computer
network, developed by BBN starting in 1975 for the U.S. DoD,
incorporating U.S. Government-furnished, military-grade COMSEC
equipment (TSEC/KG-34). [B1822] (Compare: IPLI.)
Shirey Informational [Page 234]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ privilege
1a. (I) /access control/ A synonym for "authorization". (See
authorization. Compare: permission.)
1b. (I) /computer platform/ An authorization to perform a
security-relevant function in the context of a computer's
operating system.
$ privilege management infrastructure
(O) "The infrastructure able to support the management of
privileges in support of a comprehensive authorization service and
in relationship with a" PKI; i.e., processes concerned with
attribute certificates. [X509]
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with this
definition. This definition is vague, and there is no consensus on
a more specific one.
$ privileged process
(I) A computer process that is authorized (and, therefore,
trusted) to perform some security-relevant functions that ordinary
processes are not. (See: privilege, trusted process.)
$ privileged user
(I) An user that has access to system control, monitoring, or
administration functions. (See: privilege, /UNIX/ under "root",
superuser, user.)
Tutorial: Privileged users include the following types:
- Users with near or complete control of a system, who are
authorized to set up and administer user accounts, identifiers,
and authentication information, or are authorized to assign or
change other users' access to system resources.
- Users that are authorized to change control parameters (e.g.,
network addresses, routing tables, processing priorities) on
routers, multiplexers, and other important equipment.
- Users that are authorized to monitor or perform troubleshooting
for a system's security functions, typically using special
tools and features that are not available to ordinary users.
$ probe
(I) /verb/ A technique that attempts to access a system to learn
something about the system. (See: port scan.)
Tutorial: The purpose of a probe may be offensive, e.g., an
attempt to gather information for circumventing the system's
protections; or the purpose may be defensive, e.g., to verify that
the system is working properly.
Shirey Informational [Page 235]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ procedural security
(D) Synonym for "administrative security".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"administrative security". The term may be misleading because any
type of security may involve procedures, and procedures may be
either external to the system or internal. Instead, use
"administrative security", "communication security", "computer
security", "emanations security", "personnel security", "physical
security", or whatever specific type is meant. (See: security
architecture.)
$ profile
See: certificate profile, protection profile.
$ proof-of-possession protocol
(I) A protocol whereby a system entity proves to another that it
possesses and controls a cryptographic key or other secret
information. (See: zero-knowledge proof.)
$ proprietary
(I) Refers to information (or other property) that is owned by an
individual or organization and for which the use is restricted by
that entity.
$ protected checksum
(I) A checksum that is computed for a data object by means that
protect against active attacks that would attempt to change the
checksum to make it match changes made to the data object. (See:
digital signature, keyed hash, Tutorial under "checksum".)
$ protective packaging
(N) "Packaging techniques for COMSEC material that discourage
penetration, reveal a penetration has occurred or was attempted,
or inhibit viewing or copying of keying material prior to the time
it is exposed for use." [C4009] (See: tamper-evident, tamper-
resistant. Compare: QUADRANT.)
$ protection authority
(I) See: secondary definition under "Internet Protocol Security
Option".
$ protection level
(N) /U.S. Government/ An indication of the trust that is needed in
a system's technical ability to enforce security policy for
confidentiality. (Compare: /system operation/ under "mode of
operation".)
Shirey Informational [Page 236]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: An organization's security policy could define
protection levels that are based on comparing (a) the sensitivity
of information handled by a system to (b) the authorizations of
users that receive information from the system without manual
intervention and reliable human review. For each level, the policy
could specify security features and assurances that must be
included in any system that was intended to operate at that level.
Example: Given some set of data objects that are classified at one
or more hierarchical levels and in one or more non-hierarchical
categories, the following table defines five protection levels for
systems that would handle that data. Beginning with PL1 and
evolving to PL5, each successive level would require stronger
features and assurances to handle the dataset. (See: clearance,
formal access approval, and need-to-know.)
Lowest Clearance Formal Access Need-To-Know
Among All Users Approval of Users of Users
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
PL5 | Some user has no | [Does not matter.]| [Does not matter.]|
High | clearance at all. | | |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
PL4 | All are cleared | [Does not matter.]| [Does not matter.]|
| for some data. | | |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
PL3 | All are cleared | Some not approved | [Does not matter.]|
| for all data. | for all data. | |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
PL2 | All are cleared | All are approved | Some don't need to|
| for all data. | for all data. | to know all data. |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
PL1 | All are cleared | All are approved | All have a need |
Low | for all data. | for all data. | to know all data. |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
Each of these protection levels can be viewed as being equivalent to
one or more modes of system operation defined in this Glossary:
- PL5 is equivalent to multilevel security mode.
- PL4 is equivalent to either multilevel or compartmented
security mode, depending on the details of users' clearances.
- PL3 is equivalent to partitioned security mode.
- PL2 is equivalent to system-high security mode.
- PL1 is equivalent to dedicated security mode.
$ protection profile
(N) /Common Criteria/ An implementation-independent set of
security requirements for a category of targets of evaluation that
Shirey Informational [Page 237]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
meet specific consumer needs. [CCIB] Example: [IDSAN]. (See:
target of evaluation. Compare: certificate profile, package.)
Tutorial: A protection profile (PP) is the kind of document used
by consumers to specify functional requirements they want in a
product, and a security target (ST) is the kind of document used
by vendors to make functional claims about a product.
A PP is intended to be a reusable statement of product security
needs, which are known to be useful and effective, for a set of
information technology security products that could be built. A PP
contains a set of security requirements, preferably taken from the
catalogs in Parts 2 and 3 of the Common Criteria, and should
include an EAL. A PP could be developed by user communities,
product developers, or any other parties interested in defining a
common set of requirements.
$ protection ring
(I) One of a hierarchy of privileged operation modes of a system
that gives certain access rights to processes authorized to
operate in that mode. (See: Multics.)
$ protective distribution system (PDS)
(N) A wireline or fiber-optic communication system used to
transmit cleartext classified information through an area of
lesser classification or control. [N7003]
$ protocol
1a. (I) A set of rules (i.e., formats and procedures) to implement
and control some type of association (e.g., communication) between
systems. Example: Internet Protocol.
1b. (I) A series of ordered computing and communication steps that
are performed by two or more system entities to achieve a joint
objective. [A9042]
$ protocol control information (PCI)
(N) See: secondary definition under "protocol data unit".
$ protocol data unit (PDU)
(N) A data packet that is defined for peer-to-peer transfers in a
protocol layer.
Tutorial: A PDU consists of two disjoint subsets of data: the SDU
and the PCI. (Although these terms -- PDU, SDU, and PCI --
originated in the OSIRM, they are also useful and permissible in
an IPS context.)
Shirey Informational [Page 238]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- The "service data unit" (SDU) in a packet is data that the
protocol transfers between peer protocol entities on behalf of
the users of that layer's services. For Layers 1 through 6, the
layer's users are peer protocol entities at a higher layer; for
Layer 7, the users are application entities outside the scope
of the OSIRM.
- The "protocol control information" (PCI) in a packet is data
that peer protocol entities exchange between themselves to
control their joint operation of the layer.
$ protocol suite
(I) A complementary collection of communication protocols used in
a computer network. (See: IPS, OSI.)
$ proxy
1. (I) A computer process that acts on behalf of a user or client.
2. (I) A computer process -- often used as, or as part of, a
firewall -- that relays application transactions or a protocol
between client and server computer systems, by appearing to the
client to be the server and appearing to the server to be the
client. (See: SOCKS.)
Tutorial: In a firewall, a proxy server usually runs on a bastion
host, which may support proxies for several applications and
protocols (e.g., FTP, HTTP, and TELNET). Instead of a client in
the protected enclave connecting directly to an external server,
the internal client connects to the proxy server, which in turn
connects to the external server. The proxy server waits for a
request from inside the firewall, forwards the request to the
server outside the firewall, gets the response, then sends the
response back to the client. The proxy may be transparent to the
clients, or they may need to connect first to the proxy server,
and then use that association to also initiate a connection to the
real server.
Proxies are generally preferred over SOCKS for their ability to
perform caching, high-level logging, and access control. A proxy
can provide security service beyond that which is normally part of
the relayed protocol, such as access control based on peer entity
authentication of clients, or peer entity authentication of
servers when clients do not have that ability. A proxy at OSIRM
Layer 7 can also provide finer-grained security service than can a
filtering router at Layer 3. For example, an FTP proxy could
permit transfers out of, but not into, a protected network.
Shirey Informational [Page 239]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ proxy certificate
(I) An X.509 public-key certificate derived from an end-entity
certificate, or from another proxy certificate, for the purpose of
establishing proxies and delegating authorizations in the context
of a PKI-based authentication system. [R3820]
Tutorial: A proxy certificate has the following properties:
- It contains a critical extension that (a) identifies it as a
proxy certificate and (b) may contain a certification path
length constraint and policy constraints.
- It contains the public component of a key pair that is distinct
from that associated with any other certificate.
- It is signed by the private component of a key pair that is
associated with an end-entity certificate or another proxy
certificate.
- Its associated private key can be used to sign only other proxy
certificates (not end-entity certificates).
- Its "subject" DN is derived from its "issuer" DN and is unique.
- Its "issuer" DN is the "subject" DN of an end-entity
certificate or another proxy certificate.
$ pseudorandom
(I) A sequence of values that appears to be random (i.e.,
unpredictable) but is actually generated by a deterministic
algorithm. (See: compression, random, random number generator.)
$ pseudorandom number generator
(I) See: secondary definition under "random number generator".
$ public component
(I) Synonym for "public key".
Deprecated Usage: In most cases, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term;
to avoid confusing readers, use "private key" instead. However,
the term MAY be used when discussing a key pair; e.g., "A key pair
has a public component and a private component."
$ public key
1. (I) The publicly disclosable component of a pair of
cryptographic keys used for asymmetric cryptography. (See: key
pair. Compare: private key.)
2. (O) In a public key cryptosystem, "that key of a user's key
pair which is publicly known." [X509]
Shirey Informational [Page 240]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ public-key certificate
1. (I) A digital certificate that binds a system entity's
identifier to a public key value, and possibly to additional,
secondary data items; i.e., a digitally signed data structure that
attests to the ownership of a public key. (See: X.509 public-key
certificate.)
2. (O) "The public key of a user, together with some other
information, rendered unforgeable by encipherment with the private
key of the certification authority which issued it." [X509]
Tutorial: The digital signature on a public-key certificate is
unforgeable. Thus, the certificate can be published, such as by
posting it in a directory, without the directory having to protect
the certificate's data integrity.
$ public-key cryptography
(I) Synonym for "asymmetric cryptography".
$ Public-Key Cryptography Standards (PKCS)
(N) A series of specifications published by RSA Laboratories for
data structures and algorithms used in basic applications of
asymmetric cryptography. [PKCS] (See: PKCS #5 through PKCS #11.)
Tutorial: The PKCS were begun in 1991 in cooperation with industry
and academia, originally including Apple, Digital, Lotus,
Microsoft, Northern Telecom, Sun, and MIT. Today, the
specifications are widely used, but they are not sanctioned by an
official standards organization, such as ANSI, ITU-T, or IETF. RSA
Laboratories retains sole decision-making authority over the PKCS.
$ public-key forward secrecy (PFS)
(I) For a key-agreement protocol based on asymmetric cryptography,
the property that ensures that a session key derived from a set of
long-term public and private keys will not be compromised if one
of the private keys is compromised in the future. (See: Usage note
and other discussion under "perfect forward secrecy".)
$ public-key Kerberos
(I) See: Tutorial under "Kerberos", PKINIT.
$ public-key infrastructure (PKI)
1. (I) A system of CAs (and, optionally, RAs and other supporting
servers and agents) that perform some set of certificate
management, archive management, key management, and token
management functions for a community of users in an application of
asymmetric cryptography. (See: hierarchical PKI, mesh PKI,
security management infrastructure, trust-file PKI.)
Shirey Informational [Page 241]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (I) /PKIX/ The set of hardware, software, people, policies, and
procedures needed to create, manage, store, distribute, and revoke
digital certificates based on asymmetric cryptography.
Tutorial: The core PKI functions are (a) to register users and
issue their public-key certificates, (b) to revoke certificates
when required, and (c) to archive data needed to validate
certificates at a much later time. Key pairs for data
confidentiality may be generated (and perhaps escrowed) by CAs or
RAs, but requiring a PKI client to generate its own digital
signature key pair helps maintain system integrity of the
cryptographic system, because then only the client ever possesses
the private key it uses. Also, an authority may be established to
approve or coordinate CPSs, which are security policies under
which components of a PKI operate.
A number of other servers and agents may support the core PKI, and
PKI clients may obtain services from them, such as certificate
validation services. The full range of such services is not yet
fully understood and is evolving, but supporting roles may include
archive agent, certified delivery agent, confirmation agent,
digital notary, directory, key escrow agent, key generation agent,
naming agent who ensures that issuers and subjects have unique
identifiers within the PKI, repository, ticket-granting agent,
time-stamp agent, and validation agent.
$ purge
1. (I) Synonym for "erase".
2. (O) /U.S. Government/ Use degaussing or other methods to render
magnetically stored data unusable and irrecoverable by any means,
including laboratory methods. [C4009] (Compare: /U.S. Government/
erase.)
$ QUADRANT
(O) /U.S. Government/ Short name for technology and methods that
protect cryptographic equipment by making the equipment tamper-
resistant. [C4009] (Compare: protective packaging, TEMPEST.)
Tutorial: Equipment cannot be made completely tamper-proof, but it
can be made tamper-resistant or tamper-evident.
$ qualified certificate
(I) A public-key certificate that has the primary purpose of
identifying a person with a high level of assurance, where the
certificate meets some qualification requirements defined by an
applicable legal framework, such as the European Directive on
Electronic Signature. [R3739]
Shirey Informational [Page 242]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ quick mode
(I) See: /IKE/ under "mode".
$ RA
(I) See: registration authority.
$ RA domains
(I) A feature of a CAW that allows a CA to divide the
responsibility for certificate requests among multiple RAs.
Tutorial: This ability might be used to restrict access to private
authorization data that is provided with a certificate request,
and to distribute the responsibility to review and approve
certificate requests in high-volume environments. RA domains might
segregate certificate requests according to an attribute of the
certificate's subject, such as an organizational unit.
$ RADIUS
(I) See: Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service.
$ Rainbow Series
(O) /COMPUSEC/ A set of more than 30 technical and policy
documents with colored covers, issued by the NCSC, that discuss in
detail the TCSEC and provide guidance for meeting and applying the
criteria. (See: Green Book, Orange Book, Red Book, Yellow Book.)
$ random
(I) In essence, "random" means "unpredictable". [SP22, Knut,
R4086] (See: cryptographic key, pseudorandom.)
- "Random sequence": A sequence in which each successive value is
obtained merely by chance and does not depend on the preceding
values of the sequence. In a random sequence of bits, each bit
is unpredictable; i.e., (a) the probability of each bit being a
"0" or "1" is 1/2, and (b) the value of each bit is independent
of any other bit in the sequence.
- "Random value": An individual value that is unpredictable;
i.e., each value in the total population of possibilities has
equal probability of being selected.
$ random number generator
(I) A process that is invoked to generate a random sequence of
values (usually a sequence of bits) or an individual random value.
Tutorial: There are two basic types of generators. [SP22]
- "(True) random number generator": It uses one or more non-
deterministic bit sources (e.g., electrical circuit noise,
timing of human processes such as key strokes or mouse
movements, semiconductor quantum effects, and other physical
Shirey Informational [Page 243]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
phenomena) and a processing function that formats the bits, and
it outputs a sequence of values that is unpredictable and
uniformly distributed.
- "Pseudorandom number generator": It uses a deterministic
computational process (usually implemented by software) that
has one or more inputs called "seeds", and it outputs a
sequence of values that appears to be random according to
specified statistical tests.
$ RBAC
(N) See: role-based access control, rule-based access control.
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the abbreviation is ambiguous.
$ RC2, RC4, RC6
(N) See: Rivest Cipher #2, #4, #6.
$ read
(I) /security model/ A system operation that causes a flow of
information from an object to a subject. (See: access mode.
Compare: write.)
$ realm
(I) /Kerberos/ A domain consisting of a set of Kerberized clients,
Kerberized application servers, and one or more Kerberos
authentication servers and ticket-granting servers that support
the clients and applications, all operating under the same
security policy. (See: domain.)
$ recovery
1. (I) /cryptography/ The process of learning or obtaining
cryptographic data or plain text through cryptanalysis. (See: key
recovery, data recovery.)
2a. (I) /system integrity/ The process of restoring a secure state
in a system after there has been an accidental failure or a
successful attack. (See: secondary definition under "security",
system integrity.)
2b. (I) /system integrity/ The process of restoring an information
system's assets and operation following damage or destruction.
(See: contingency plan.)
$ RED
1. (N) Designation for data that consists only of clear text, and
for information system equipment items and facilities that handle
Shirey Informational [Page 244]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
clear text. Example: "RED key". (See: BCR, color change, RED/BLACK
separation. Compare: BLACK.)
Derivation: From the practice of marking equipment with colors to
prevent operational errors.
2. (O) /U.S. Government/ Designation applied to information
systems, and to associated areas, circuits, components, and
equipment, "in which unencrypted national security information is
being processed." [C4009]
$ RED/BLACK separation
(N) An architectural concept for cryptographic systems that
strictly separates the parts of a system that handle plain text
(i.e., RED information) from the parts that handle cipher text
(i.e., BLACK information). (See: BLACK, RED.)
$ Red Book
(D) /slang/ Synonym for "Trusted Network Interpretation of the
Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria" [NCS05].
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. Instead, use the
full proper name of the document or, in subsequent references, a
more conventional abbreviation, e.g., TNI-TCSEC. (See: TCSEC,
Rainbow Series, Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
$ RED key
(N) A cleartext key, which is usable in its present form (i.e., it
does not need to be decrypted before being used). (See: RED.
Compare: BLACK key.)
$ reference monitor
(I) "An access control concept that refers to an abstract machine
that mediates all accesses to objects by subjects." [NCS04] (See:
security kernel.)
Tutorial: This concept was described in the Anderson report. A
reference monitor should be (a) complete (i.e., it mediates every
access), (b) isolated (i.e., it cannot be modified by other system
entities), and (c) verifiable (i.e., small enough to be subjected
to analysis and tests to ensure that it is correct).
$ reflection attack
(I) An attack in which a valid data transmission is replayed to
the originator by an attacker who intercepts the original
transmission. (Compare: indirect attack, replay attack.)
Shirey Informational [Page 245]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ reflector attack
(D) Synonym for "indirect attack".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it could be
confused with "reflection attack", which is a different concept.
$ registered user
(I) A system entity that is authorized to receive a system's
products and services or otherwise access system resources. (See:
registration, user.)
$ registration
1. (I) /information system/ A system process that (a) initializes
an identity (of a system entity) in the system, (b) establishes an
identifier for that identity, (c) may associate authentication
information with that identifier, and (d) may issue an identifier
credential (depending on the type of authentication mechanism
being used). (See: authentication information, credential,
identifier, identity, identity proofing.)
2. (I) /PKI/ An administrative act or process whereby an entity's
name and other attributes are established for the first time at a
CA, prior to the CA issuing a digital certificate that has the
entity's name as the subject. (See: registration authority.)
Tutorial: Registration may be accomplished either directly, by the
CA, or indirectly, by a separate RA. An entity is presented to the
CA or RA, and the authority either records the name(s) claimed for
the entity or assigns the entity's name(s). The authority also
determines and records other attributes of the entity that are to
be bound in a certificate (such as a public key or authorizations)
or maintained in the authority's database (such as street address
and telephone number). The authority is responsible, possibly
assisted by an RA, for verifying the entity's identity and vetting
the other attributes, in accordance with the CA's CPS.
Among the registration issues that a CPS may address are the
following [R3647]:
- How a claimed identity and other attributes are verified.
- How organization affiliation or representation is verified.
- What forms of names are permitted, such as X.500 DN, domain
name, or IP address.
- Whether names are required to be meaningful or unique, and
within what domain.
- How naming disputes are resolved, including the role of
trademarks.
- Whether certificates are issued to entities that are not
persons.
Shirey Informational [Page 246]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- Whether a person is required to appear before the CA or RA, or
can instead be represented by an agent.
- Whether and how an entity proves possession of the private key
matching a public key.
$ registration authority (RA)
1. (I) An optional PKI entity (separate from the CAs) that does
not sign either digital certificates or CRLs but has
responsibility for recording or verifying some or all of the
information (particularly the identities of subjects) needed by a
CA to issue certificates and CRLs and to perform other certificate
management functions. (See: ORA, registration.)
2. (I) /PKIX/ An optional PKI component, separate from the CA(s).
The functions that the RA performs will vary from case to case but
may include identity authentication and name assignment, key
generation and archiving of key pairs, token distribution, and
revocation reporting. [R4210]
Tutorial: Sometimes, a CA may perform all certificate management
functions for all end users for which the CA signs certificates.
Other times, such as in a large or geographically dispersed
community, it may be necessary or desirable to offload secondary
CA functions and delegate them to an assistant, while the CA
retains the primary functions (signing certificates and CRLs). The
tasks that are delegated to an RA by a CA may include personal
authentication, name assignment, token distribution, revocation
reporting, key generation, and archiving.
An RA is an optional PKI entity, separate from the CA, that is
assigned secondary functions. The duties assigned to RAs vary from
case to case but may include the following:
- Verifying a subject's identity, i.e., performing personal
authentication functions.
- Assigning a name to a subject. (See: distinguished name.)
- Verifying that a subject is entitled to have the attributes
requested for a certificate.
- Verifying that a subject possesses the private key that matches
the public key requested for a certificate.
- Performing functions beyond mere registration, such as
generating key pairs, distributing tokens, handling revocation
reports, and archiving data. (Such functions may be assigned to
a PKI component that is separate from both the CA and the RA.)
3. (O) /SET/ "An independent third-party organization that
processes payment card applications for multiple payment card
brands and forwards applications to the appropriate financial
institutions." [SET2]
Shirey Informational [Page 247]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ regrade
(I) Deliberately change the security level (especially the
hierarchical classification level) of information in an authorized
manner. (See: downgrade, upgrade.)
$ rekey
(I) Change the value of a cryptographic key that is being used in
an application of a cryptographic system. (See: certificate
rekey.)
Tutorial: Rekey is required at the end of a cryptoperiod or key
lifetime.
$ reliability
(I) The ability of a system to perform a required function under
stated conditions for a specified period of time. (Compare:
availability, survivability.)
$ reliable human review
(I) Any manual, automated, or hybrid process or procedure that
ensures that a human examines a digital object, such as text or an
image, to determine whether the object may be permitted, according
to some security policy, to be transferred across a controlled
interface. (See: guard.)
$ relying party
(I) Synonym for "certificate user".
Usage: Used in a legal context to mean a recipient of a
certificate who acts in reliance on that certificate. (See: ABA
Guidelines.)
$ remanence
(I) Residual information that can be recovered from a storage
medium after clearing. (See: clear, magnetic remanence, purge.)
$ Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS)
(I) An Internet protocol [R2865] for carrying dial-in users'
authentication information and configuration information between a
shared, centralized authentication server (the RADIUS server) and
a network access server (the RADIUS client) that needs to
authenticate the users of its network access ports. (See: TACACS.)
User presents authentication and possibly other information to the
RADIUS client (e.g., health information regarding the user
device).
Shirey Informational [Page 248]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: A user presents authentication information and possibly
other information to the RADIUS client, and the client passes that
information to the RADIUS server. The server authenticates the
client using a shared secret value and checks the presented
information, and then returns to the client all authorization and
configuration information needed by the client to serve the user.
$ renew
See: certificate renewal.
$ reordering
(I) /packet/ See: secondary definition under "stream integrity
service".
$ replay attack
(I) An attack in which a valid data transmission is maliciously or
fraudulently repeated, either by the originator or by a third
party who intercepts the data and retransmits it, possibly as part
of a masquerade attack. (See: active wiretapping, fresh, liveness,
nonce. Compare: indirect attack, reflection attack.)
$ repository
1. (I) A system for storing and distributing digital certificates
and related information (including CRLs, CPSs, and certificate
policies) to certificate users. (Compare: archive, directory.)
2. (O) "A trustworthy system for storing and retrieving
certificates or other information relevant to certificates." [DSG]
Tutorial: A certificate is published to those who might need it by
putting it in a repository. The repository usually is a publicly
accessible, on-line server. In the FPKI, for example, the expected
repository is a directory that uses LDAP, but also may be an X.500
Directory that uses DAP, or an HTTP server, or an FTP server that
permits anonymous login.
$ repudiation
1. (I) Denial by a system entity that was involved in an
association (especially a communication association that transfers
data) of having participated in the relationship. (See:
accountability, non-repudiation service.)
2. (I) A type of threat action whereby an entity deceives another
by falsely denying responsibility for an act. (See: deception.)
Shirey Informational [Page 249]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: This type of threat action includes the following subtypes:
- False denial of origin: Action whereby an originator denies
responsibility for sending data.
- False denial of receipt: Action whereby a recipient denies
receiving and possessing data.
3. (O) /OSIRM/ "Denial by one of the entities involved in a
communication of having participated in all or part of the
communication." [I7498-2]
$ Request for Comment (RFC)
1. (I) One of the documents in the archival series that is the
official channel for IDOCs and other publications of the Internet
Engineering Steering Group, the Internet Architecture Board, and
the Internet community in general. (RFC 2026, 2223) (See: Internet
Standard.)
2. (D) A popularly misused synonym for a document on the Internet
Standards Track, i.e., an Internet Standard, Draft Standard, or
Proposed Standard. (See: Internet Standard.)
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with
definition 2 because many other types of documents also are
published as RFCs.
$ residual risk
(I) The portion of an original risk or set of risks that remains
after countermeasures have been applied. (Compare: acceptable
risk, risk analysis.)
$ restore
See: card restore.
$ reverse engineering
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "intrusion".
$ revocation
See: certificate revocation.
$ revocation date
(N) /X.509/ In a CRL entry, a date-time field that states when the
certificate revocation occurred, i.e., when the CA declared the
digital certificate to be invalid. (See: invalidity date.)
Tutorial: The revocation date may not resolve some disputes
because, in the worst case, all signatures made during the
validity period of the certificate may have to be considered
invalid. However, it may be desirable to treat a digital signature
Shirey Informational [Page 250]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
as valid even though the private key used to sign was compromised
after the signing. If more is known about when the compromise
actually occurred, a second date-time, an "invalidity date", can
be included in an extension of the CRL entry.
$ revocation list
See: certificate revocation list.
$ revoke
(I) See: certificate revocation.
$ RFC
(I) See: Request for Comment.
$ Rijndael
(N) A symmetric, block cipher that was designed by Joan Daemen and
Vincent Rijmen as a candidate for the AES, and that won that
competition. [Daem] (See: Advanced Encryption Standard.)
$ risk
1. (I) An expectation of loss expressed as the probability that a
particular threat will exploit a particular vulnerability with a
particular harmful result. (See: residual risk.)
2. (O) /SET/ "The possibility of loss because of one or more
threats to information (not to be confused with financial or
business risk)." [SET2]
Tutorial: There are four basic ways to deal with a risk [SP30]:
- "Risk avoidance": Eliminate the risk by either countering the
threat or removing the vulnerability. (Compare: "avoidance"
under "security".)
- "Risk transference": Shift the risk to another system or
entity; e.g., buy insurance to compensate for potential loss.
- "Risk limitation": Limit the risk by implementing controls that
minimize resulting loss.
- "Risk assumption": Accept the potential for loss and continue
operating the system.
$ risk analysis
(I) An assessment process that systematically (a) identifies
valuable system resources and threats to those resources, (b)
quantifies loss exposures (i.e., loss potential) based on
estimated frequencies and costs of occurrence, and (c)
(optionally) recommends how to allocate available resources to
countermeasures so as to minimize total exposure. (See: risk
management, business-case analysis. Compare: threat analysis.)
Shirey Informational [Page 251]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Usually, it is financially and technically infeasible to
avoid or transfer all risks (see: "first corollary" of "second
law" under "Courtney's laws"), and some residual risks will
remain, even after all available countermeasures have been
deployed (see: "second corollary" of "second law" under
"Courtney's laws"). Thus, a risk analysis typically lists risks in
order of cost and criticality, thereby determining where
countermeasures should be applied first. [FP031, R2196]
In some contexts, it is infeasible or inadvisable to attempt a
complete or quantitative risk analysis because needed data, time,
and expertise are not available. Instead, basic answers to
questions about threats and risks may be already built into
institutional security policies. For example, U.S. DoD policies
for data confidentiality "do not explicitly itemize the range of
expected threats" but instead "reflect an operational approach ...
by stating the particular management controls that must be used to
achieve [confidentiality] ... Thus, they avoid listing threats,
which would represent a severe risk in itself, and avoid the risk
of poor security design implicit in taking a fresh approach to
each new problem". [NRC91]
$ risk assumption
(I) See: secondary definition under "risk".
$ risk avoidance
(I) See: secondary definition under "risk".
$ risk limitation
(I) See: secondary definition under "risk".
$ risk management
1. (I) The process of identifying, measuring, and controlling
(i.e., mitigating) risks in information systems so as to reduce
the risks to a level commensurate with the value of the assets
protected. (See: risk analysis.)
2. (I) The process of controlling uncertain events that may affect
information system resources.
3. (O) "The total process of identifying, controlling, and
mitigating information system-related risks. It includes risk
assessment; cost-benefit analysis; and the selection,
implementation, test, and security evaluation of safeguards. This
overall system security review considers both effectiveness and
efficiency, including impact on the mission and constraints due to
policy, regulations, and laws." [SP30]
Shirey Informational [Page 252]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ risk transference
(I) See: secondary definition under "risk".
$ Rivest Cipher #2 (RC2)
(N) A proprietary, variable-key-length block cipher invented by
Ron Rivest for RSA Data Security, Inc.
$ Rivest Cipher #4 (RC4)
(N) A proprietary, variable-key-length stream cipher invented by
Ron Rivest for RSA Data Security, Inc.
$ Rivest Cipher #6 (RC6)
(N) A symmetric, block cipher with 128-bit or longer key length,
developed by Ron Rivest for RSA Data Security, Inc. as a candidate
for the AES.
$ Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA)
(N) An algorithm for asymmetric cryptography, invented in 1977 by
Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman [RSA78].
Tutorial: RSA uses exponentiation modulo the product of two large
prime numbers. The difficulty of breaking RSA is believed to be
equivalent to the difficulty of factoring integers that are the
product of two large prime numbers of approximately equal size.
To create an RSA key pair, randomly choose two large prime
numbers, p and q, and compute the modulus, n = pq. Randomly choose
a number e, the public exponent, that is less than n and
relatively prime to (p-1)(q-1). Choose another number d, the
private exponent, such that ed-1 evenly divides (p-1)(q-1). The
public key is the set of numbers (n,e), and the private key is the
set (n,d).
It is assumed to be difficult to compute the private key (n,d)
from the public key (n,e). However, if n can be factored into p
and q, then the private key d can be computed easily. Thus, RSA
security depends on the assumption that it is computationally
difficult to factor a number that is the product of two large
prime numbers. (Of course, p and q are treated as part of the
private key, or else are destroyed after computing n.)
For encryption of a message, m, to be sent to Bob, Alice uses
Bob's public key (n,e) to compute m**e (mod n) = c. She sends c to
Bob. Bob computes c**d (mod n) = m. Only Bob knows d, so only Bob
can compute c**d (mod n) to recover m.
To provide data origin authentication of a message, m, to be sent
to Bob, Alice computes m**d (mod n) = s, where (d,n) is Alice's
Shirey Informational [Page 253]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
private key. She sends m and s to Bob. To recover the message that
only Alice could have sent, Bob computes s**e (mod n) = m, where
(e,n) is Alice's public key.
To ensure data integrity in addition to data origin authentication
requires extra computation steps in which Alice and Bob use a
cryptographic hash function h (see: digital signature). Alice
computes the hash value h(m) = v, and then encrypts v with her
private key to get s. She sends m and s. Bob receives m' and s',
either of which might have been changed from the m and s that
Alice sent. To test this, he decrypts s' with Alice's public key
to get v'. He then computes h(m') = v". If v' equals v", Bob is
assured that m' is the same m that Alice sent.
$ robustness
(N) See: level of robustness.
$ role
1. (I) A job function or employment position to which people or
other system entities may be assigned in a system. (See: role-
based access control. Compare: duty, billet, principal, user.)
2. (O) /Common Criteria/ A pre-defined set of rules establishing
the allowed interactions between a user and the TOE.
$ role-based access control
(I) A form of identity-based access control wherein the system
entities that are identified and controlled are functional
positions in an organization or process. [Sand] (See:
authorization, constraint, identity, principal, role.)
Tutorial: Administrators assign permissions to roles as needed to
perform functions in the system. Administrators separately assign
user identities to roles. When a user accesses the system in an
identity (for which the user has been registered) and initiates a
session using a role (to which the user has been assigned), then
the permissions that have been assigned to the role are available
to be exercised by the user.
The following diagram shows that role-based access control
involves five different relationships: (a) administrators assign
identities to roles, (b) administrators assign permissions to
roles, (c) administrators assign roles to roles, (d) users select
identities in sessions, and (e) users select roles in sessions.
Security policies may define constraints on these assignments and
selections.
Shirey Informational [Page 254]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
(c) Permission Inheritance Assignments (i.e., Role Hierarchy)
[Constraints]
+=====+
| |
(a) Identity v v (b) Permission
+----------+ Assignments +-------+ Assignments +----------+
|Identities|<=============>| Roles |<=============>|Permissions|
+----------+ [Constraints] +-------+ [Constraints] +----------+
| | ^ ^
| | +-----------+ | | +---------------------+
| | | +-------+ | | | | Legend |
| +====>|Session|=====+ | | |
| | +-------+ | | | One-to-One |
| | ... | | | =================== |
| | +-------+ | | | |
+========>|Session|=========+ | One-to-Many |
(d) Identity | +-------+ | (e) Role | ==================> |
Selections | | Selections | |
[Constraints]| Access |[Constraints] | Many-to-Many |
| Sessions | | <=================> |
+-----------+ +---------------------+
$ role certificate
(I) An organizational certificate that is issued to a system
entity that is a member of the set of users that have identities
that are assigned to the same role. (See: role-based access
control.)
$ root, root CA
1. (I) /PKI/ A CA that is directly trusted by an end entity. (See:
trust anchor, trusted CA.)
2. (I) /hierarchical PKI/ The CA that is the highest level (most
trusted) CA in a certification hierarchy; i.e., the authority upon
whose public key all certificate users base their validation of
certificates, CRLs, certification paths, and other constructs.
(See: top CA.)
Tutorial: The root CA in a certification hierarchy issues public-
key certificates to one or more additional CAs that form the
second-highest level. Each of these CAs may issue certificates to
more CAs at the third-highest level, and so on. To initialize
operation of a hierarchical PKI, the root's initial public key is
securely distributed to all certificate users in a way that does
not depend on the PKI's certification relationships, i.e., by an
out-of-band procedure. The root's public key may be distributed
simply as a numerical value, but typically is distributed in a
self-signed certificate in which the root is the subject. The
Shirey Informational [Page 255]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
root's certificate is signed by the root itself because there is
no higher authority in a certification hierarchy. The root's
certificate is then the first certificate in every certification
path.
3. (I) /DNS/ The base of the tree structure that defines the name
space for the Internet DNS. (See: domain name.)
4. (O) /MISSI/ A name previously used for a MISSI policy creation
authority, which is not a root as defined above for general usage,
but is a CA at the second level of the MISSI hierarchy,
immediately subordinate to a MISSI policy approving authority.
5. (O) /UNIX/ A user account (a.k.a. "superuser") that has all
privileges (including all security-related privileges) and thus
can manage the system and its other user accounts.
$ root certificate
1. (I) /PKI/ A certificate for which the subject is a root. (See:
trust anchor certificate, trusted certificate.)
2. (I) /hierarchical PKI/ The self-signed public-key certificate
at the top of a certification hierarchy.
$ root key
(I) /PKI/ A public key for which the matching private key is held
by a root. (See: trust anchor key, trusted key.)
$ root registry
(O) /MISSI/ A name previously used for a MISSI PAA.
$ ROT13
(I) See: secondary definition under "Caesar cipher".
$ router
1a. (I) /IP/ A networked computer that forwards IP packets that
are not addressed to the computer itself. (Compare: host.)
1b. (I) /IPS/ A gateway that operates in the IPS Internet Layer to
connect two or more subnetworks.
1c. (N) /OSIRM/ A computer that is a gateway between two networks
at OSIRM Layer 3 and that relays and directs data packets through
that internetwork. (Compare: bridge, proxy.)
$ RSA
(N) See: Rivest-Shamir-Adleman.
Shirey Informational [Page 256]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ rule
See: policy rule.
$ rule-based security policy
(I) "A security policy based on global rules [i.e., policy rules]
imposed for all users. These rules usually rely on comparison of
the sensitivity of the resource being accessed and the possession
of corresponding attributes of users, a group of users, or
entities acting on behalf of users." [I7498-2] (Compare: identity-
based security policy, policy rule, RBAC.)
$ rules of behavior
(I) A body of security policy that has been established and
implemented concerning the responsibilities and expected behavior
of entities that have access to a system. (Compare: [R1281].)
Tutorial: For persons employed by a corporation or government, the
rules might cover such matters as working at home, remote access,
use of the Internet, use of copyrighted works, use of system
resources for unofficial purpose, assignment and limitation of
system privileges, and individual accountability.
$ S field
(D) See: Security Level field.
$ S-BGP
(I) See: Secure BGP.
$ S-HTTP
(I) See: Secure Hypertext Transfer Protocol.
$ S/Key
(I) A security mechanism that uses a cryptographic hash function
to generate a sequence of 64-bit, one-time passwords for remote
user login. [R1760]
Tutorial: The client generates a one-time password by applying the
MD4 cryptographic hash function multiple times to the user's
secret key. For each successive authentication of the user, the
number of hash applications is reduced by one. (Thus, an intruder
using wiretapping cannot compute a valid password from knowledge
of one previously used.) The server verifies a password by hashing
the currently presented password (or initialization value) one
time and comparing the hash result with the previously presented
password.
$ S/MIME
(I) See: Secure/MIME.
Shirey Informational [Page 257]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ SAD
(I) See: Security Association Database.
$ safety
(I) The property of a system being free from risk of causing harm
(especially physical harm) to its system entities. (Compare:
security.)
$ SAID
(I) See: security association identifier.
$ salami swindle
(D) /slang/ "Slicing off a small amount from each transaction.
This kind of theft was made worthwhile by automation. Given a high
transaction flow, even rounding down to the nearest cent and
putting the 'extra' in a bogus account can be very profitable."
[NCSSG]
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ salt
(I) A data value used to vary the results of a computation in a
security mechanism, so that an exposed computational result from
one instance of applying the mechanism cannot be reused by an
attacker in another instance. (Compare: initialization value.)
Example: A password-based access control mechanism might protect
against capture or accidental disclosure of its password file by
applying a one-way encryption algorithm to passwords before
storing them in the file. To increase the difficulty of off-line,
dictionary attacks that match encrypted values of potential
passwords against a copy of the password file, the mechanism can
concatenate each password with its own random salt value before
applying the one-way function.
$ SAML
(N) See: Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML).
$ sandbox
(I) A restricted, controlled execution environment that prevents
potentially malicious software, such as mobile code, from
accessing any system resources except those for which the software
is authorized.
Shirey Informational [Page 258]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ sanitize
1. (I) Delete sensitive data from a file, device, or system. (See:
erase, zeroize.)
2. (I) Modify data so as to be able either (a) to completely
declassify it or (b) to downgrade it to a lower security level.
$ SAP
(O) See: special access program.
$ SASL
(I) See: Simple Authentication and Security Layer.
$ SCA
(I) See: subordinate certification authority.
$ scavenging
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "exposure".
$ SCI
(O) See: sensitive compartmented information.
$ SCIF
(O) See: sensitive compartmented information facility.
$ SCOMP
(N) Secure COMmunications Processor; an enhanced, MLS version of
the Honeywell Level 6 minicomputer. It was the first system to be
rated in TCSEC Class A1. (See: KSOS.)
$ screen room
(D) /slang/ Synonym for "shielded enclosure" in the context of
electromagnetic emanations. (See: EMSEC, TEMPEST.)
Deprecated Term: To avoid international misunderstanding, IDOCs
SHOULD NOT use this term.
$ screening router
(I) Synonym for "filtering router".
$ script kiddy
(D) /slang/ A cracker who is able to use existing attack
techniques (i.e., to read scripts) and execute existing attack
software, but is unable to invent new exploits or manufacture the
tools to perform them; pejoratively, an immature or novice
cracker.
Shirey Informational [Page 259]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ SDE
(N) See: Secure Data Exchange.
$ SDNS
(O) See: Secure Data Network System.
$ SDU
(N) See: "service data unit" under "protocol data unit".
$ seal
1. (I) To use asymmetric cryptography to encrypt plain text with a
public key in such a way that only the holder of the matching
private key can learn what was the plain text. [Chau] (Compare:
shroud, wrap.)
Deprecated Usage: An IDOC SHOULD NOT use this term with definition
1 unless the IDOC includes the definition, because the definition
is not widely known and the concept can be expressed by using
other, standard terms. Instead, use "salt and encrypt" or other
terminology that is specific with regard to the mechanism being
used.
Tutorial: The definition does *not* say "only the holder of the
matching private key can decrypt the ciphertext to learn what was
the plaintext"; sealing is stronger than that. If Alice simply
encrypts a plaintext P with a public key K to produce ciphertext C
= K(P), then if Bob guesses that P = X, Bob could verify the guess
by checking whether K(P) = K(X). To "seal" P and block Bob's
guessing attack, Alice could attach a long string R of random bits
to P before encrypting to produce C = K(P,R); if Bob guesses that
P = X, Bob can only test the guess by also guessing R. (See:
salt.)
2. (D) To use cryptography to provide data integrity service for a
data object. (See: sign.)
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with
definition 2. Instead, use a term that is more specific with
regard to the mechanism used to provide the data integrity
service; e.g., use "sign" when the mechanism is digital signature.
Shirey Informational [Page 260]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ secret
1a. (I) /adjective/ The condition of information being protected
from being known by any system entities except those that are
intended to know it. (See: data confidentiality.)
1b. (I) /noun/ An item of information that is protected thusly.
Usage: This term applies to symmetric keys, private keys, and
passwords.
$ secret key
(D) A key that is kept secret or needs to be kept secret.
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it mixes concepts
in a potentially misleading way. In the context of asymmetric
cryptography, IDOCs SHOULD use "private key". In the context of
symmetric cryptography, the adjective "secret" is unnecessary
because all keys must be kept secret.
$ secret-key cryptography
(D) Synonym for "symmetric cryptography".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it could be
confused with "asymmetric cryptography", in which the private key
is kept secret.
Derivation: Symmetric cryptography is sometimes called "secret-key
cryptography" because entities that share the key, such as the
originator and the recipient of a message, need to keep the key
secret from other entities.
$ Secure BGP (S-BGP)
(I) A project of BBN Technologies, sponsored by the U.S. DoD's
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, to design and
demonstrate an architecture to secure the Border Gateway Protocol
(RFC 1771) and to promote deployment of that architecture in the
Internet.
Tutorial: S-BGP incorporates three security mechanisms:
- A PKI supports authentication of ownership of IP address
blocks, autonomous system (AS) numbers, an AS's identity, and a
BGP router's identity and its authorization to represent an AS.
This PKI parallels and takes advantage of the Internet's
existing IP address and AS number assignment system.
- A new, optional, BGP transitive path attribute carries digital
signatures (in "attestations") covering the routing information
in a BGP UPDATE. These signatures along with certificates from
the S-BGP PKI enable the receiver of a BGP routing UPDATE to
Shirey Informational [Page 261]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
validate the attribute and gain trust in the address prefixes
and path information that it contains.
- IPsec provides data and partial sequence integrity, and enables
BGP routers to authenticate each other for exchanges of BGP
control traffic.
$ Secure Data Exchange (SDE)
(N) A LAN security protocol defined by the IEEE 802.10 standard.
$ Secure Data Network System (SDNS)
(O) An NSA program that developed security protocols for
electronic mail (see: MSP), OSIRM Layer 3 (see: SP3), OSIRM Layer
4 (see: SP4), and key establishment (see: KMP).
$ secure distribution
(I) See: trusted distribution.
$ Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA)
(N) A cryptographic hash function (specified in SHS) that produces
an output (see: "hash result") -- of selectable length of either
160, 224, 256, 384, or 512 bits -- for input data of any length <
2**64 bits.
$ Secure Hash Standard (SHS)
(N) The U.S. Government standard [FP180] that specifies SHA.
$ Secure Hypertext Transfer Protocol (S-HTTP)
(I) An Internet protocol [R2660] for providing client-server
security services for HTTP communications. (Compare: https.)
Tutorial: S-HTTP was originally specified by CommerceNet, a
coalition of businesses interested in developing the Internet for
commercial uses. Several message formats may be incorporated into
S-HTTP clients and servers, particularly CMS and MOSS. S-HTTP
supports choice of security policies, key management mechanisms,
and cryptographic algorithms through option negotiation between
parties for each transaction. S-HTTP supports modes of operation
for both asymmetric and symmetric cryptography. S-HTTP attempts to
avoid presuming a particular trust model, but it attempts to
facilitate multiply rooted, hierarchical trust and anticipates
that principals may have many public-key certificates.
$ Secure/MIME (S/MIME)
(I) Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions, an Internet
protocol [R3851] to provide encryption and digital signatures for
Internet mail messages.
Shirey Informational [Page 262]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ secure multicast
(I) Refers generally to providing security services for multicast
groups of various types (e.g., 1-to-N and M-to-N) and to classes
of protocols used to protect multicast packets.
Tutorial: Multicast applications include video broadcast and
multicast file transfer, and many of these applications require
network security services. The Multicast Security Reference
Framework [R3740] covers three functional areas:
- Multicast data handling: Security-related treatment of
multicast data by the sender and the receiver.
- Group key management: Secure distribution and refreshment of
keying material. (See: Group Domain of Interpretation.)
- Multicast security policy: Policy translation and
interpretation across the multiple administrative domains that
typically are spanned by a multicast application.
$ Secure Shell(trademark) (SSH(trademark))
(N) Refers to a protocol for secure remote login and other secure
network services.
Usage: On the Web site of SSH Communication Security Corporation,
at http://www.ssh.com/legal_notice.html, it says, "SSH [and] the
SSH logo ... are either trademarks or registered trademarks of
SSH." This Glossary seeks to make readers aware of this trademark
claim but takes no position on its validity.
Tutorial: SSH has three main parts:
- Transport layer protocol: Provides server authentication,
confidentiality, and integrity; and can optionally provide
compression. This layer typically runs over a TCP connection,
but might also run on top of any other reliable data stream.
- User authentication protocol: Authenticates the client-side
user to the server. It runs over the transport layer protocol.
- Connection protocol: Multiplexes the encrypted tunnel into
several logical channels. It runs over the user authentication
protocol.
$ Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)
(N) An Internet protocol (originally developed by Netscape
Communications, Inc.) that uses connection-oriented end-to-end
encryption to provide data confidentiality service and data
integrity service for traffic between a client (often a web
browser) and a server, and that can optionally provide peer entity
authentication between the client and the server. (See: Transport
Layer Security.)
Shirey Informational [Page 263]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: SSL has two layers; SSL's lower layer, the SSL Record
Protocol, is layered on top of an IPS Transport-Layer protocol and
encapsulates protocols that run in the upper layer. The upper-
layer protocols are the three SSL management protocols -- SSL
Handshake Protocol, SSL Change Cipher Spec Protocol, or SSL Alert
Protocol -- and some Application-Layer protocol (e.g., HTTP).
The SSL management protocols provide asymmetric cryptography for
server authentication (verifying the server's identity to the
client) and optional client authentication (verifying the client's
identity to the server), and also enable them, before the
application protocol transmits or receives data, to negotiate a
symmetric encryption algorithm and secret session key (to use for
data confidentiality service) and a keyed hash (to use for data
integrity service).
SSL is independent of the application it encapsulates, and any
application can layer on top of SSL transparently. However, many
Internet applications might be better served by IPsec.
$ secure state
1a. (I) A system condition in which the system is in conformance
with the applicable security policy. (Compare: clean system,
transaction.)
1b. (I) /formal model/ A system condition in which no subject can
access any object in an unauthorized manner. (See: secondary
definition under "Bell-LaPadula model".)
$ security
1a. (I) A system condition that results from the establishment and
maintenance of measures to protect the system.
1b. (I) A system condition in which system resources are free from
unauthorized access and from unauthorized or accidental change,
destruction, or loss. (Compare: safety.)
2. (I) Measures taken to protect a system.
Tutorial: Parker [Park] suggests that providing a condition of
system security may involve the following six basic functions,
which overlap to some extent:
- "Deterrence": Reducing an intelligent threat by discouraging
action, such as by fear or doubt. (See: attack, threat action.)
- "Avoidance": Reducing a risk by either reducing the value of
the potential loss or reducing the probability that the loss
will occur. (See: risk analysis. Compare: "risk avoidance"
under "risk".)
Shirey Informational [Page 264]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- "Prevention": Impeding or thwarting a potential security
violation by deploying a countermeasure.
- "Detection": Determining that a security violation is
impending, is in progress, or has recently occurred, and thus
make it possible to reduce the potential loss. (See: intrusion
detection.)
- "Recovery": Restoring a normal state of system operation by
compensating for a security violation, possibly by eliminating
or repairing its effects. (See: contingency plan, main entry
for "recovery".)
- "Correction": Changing a security architecture to eliminate or
reduce the risk of reoccurrence of a security violation or
threat consequence, such as by eliminating a vulnerability.
$ security architecture
(I) A plan and set of principles that describe (a) the security
services that a system is required to provide to meet the needs of
its users, (b) the system components required to implement the
services, and (c) the performance levels required in the
components to deal with the threat environment (e.g., [R2179]).
(See: defense in depth, IATF, OSIRM Security Architecture,
security controls, Tutorial under "security policy".)
Tutorial: A security architecture is the result of applying the
system engineering process. A complete system security
architecture includes administrative security, communication
security, computer security, emanations security, personnel
security, and physical security. A complete security architecture
needs to deal with both intentional, intelligent threats and
accidental threats.
$ Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)
(N) A protocol consisting of XML-based request and response
message formats for exchanging security information, expressed in
the form of assertions about subjects, between on-line business
partners. [SAML]
$ security association
1. (I) A relationship established between two or more entities to
enable them to protect data they exchange. (See: association,
ISAKMP, SAD. Compare: session.)
Tutorial: The relationship is represented by a set of data that is
shared between the entities and is agreed upon and considered a
contract between them. The data describes how the associated
entities jointly use security services. The relationship is used
to negotiate characteristics of security mechanisms, but the
Shirey Informational [Page 265]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
relationship is usually understood to exclude the mechanisms
themselves.
2. (I) /IPsec/ A simplex (uni-directional) logical connection
created for security purposes and implemented with either AH or
ESP (but not both). The security services offered by a security
association depend on the protocol (AH or ESP), the IPsec mode
(transport or tunnel), the endpoints, and the election of optional
services within the protocol. A security association is identified
by a triple consisting of (a) a destination IP address, (b) a
protocol (AH or ESP) identifier, and (c) a Security Parameter
Index.
3. (O) "A set of policy and cryptographic keys that provide
security services to network traffic that matches that policy".
[R3740] (See: cryptographic association, group security
association.)
4. (O) "The totality of communications and security mechanisms and
functions (e.g., communications protocols, security protocols,
security mechanisms and functions) that securely binds together
two security contexts in different end systems or relay systems
supporting the same information domain." [DoD6]
$ Security Association Database (SAD)
(I) /IPsec/ In an IPsec implementation that operates in a network
node, a database that contains parameters to describe the status
and operation of each of the active security associations that the
node has established with other nodes. Separate inbound and
outbound SADs are needed because of the directionality of IPsec
security associations. [R4301] (Compare: SPD.)
$ security association identifier (SAID)
(I) A data field in a security protocol (such as NLSP or SDE),
used to identify the security association to which a PDU is bound.
The SAID value is usually used to select a key for decryption or
authentication at the destination. (See: Security Parameter
Index.)
$ security assurance
1. (I) An attribute of an information system that provides grounds
for having confidence that the system operates such that the
system's security policy is enforced. (Compare: trust.)
2. (I) A procedure that ensures a system is developed and operated
as intended by the system's security policy.
Shirey Informational [Page 266]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
3. (D) "The degree of confidence one has that the security
controls operate correctly and protect the system as intended."
[SP12]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use definition 3; it is a
definition for "assurance level" rather than for "assurance".
4. (D) /U.S. Government, identity authentication/ The (a) "degree
of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the
identity of the individual to whom the [identity] credential was
issued" and the (b) "degree of confidence that the individual who
uses the credential is the individual to whom the credential was
issued". [M0404]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use definition 4; it mixes
concepts in a potentially misleading way. Part "a" is a definition
for "assurance level" (rather than "security assurance") of an
identity registration process; and part "b" is a definition for
"assurance level" (rather than "security assurance") of an
identity authentication process. Also, the processes of
registration and authentication should be defined and designed
separately to ensure clarity in certification.
$ security audit
(I) An independent review and examination of a system's records
and activities to determine the adequacy of system controls,
ensure compliance with established security policy and procedures,
detect breaches in security services, and recommend any changes
that are indicated for countermeasures. [I7498-2, NCS01] (Compare:
accounting, intrusion detection.)
Tutorial: The basic audit objective is to establish accountability
for system entities that initiate or participate in security-
relevant events and actions. Thus, means are needed to generate
and record a security audit trail and to review and analyze the
audit trail to discover and investigate security violations.
$ security audit trail
(I) A chronological record of system activities that is sufficient
to enable the reconstruction and examination of the sequence of
environments and activities surrounding or leading to an
operation, procedure, or event in a security-relevant transaction
from inception to final results. [NCS04] (See: security audit.)
$ security by obscurity
(O) Attempting to maintain or increase security of a system by
keeping secret the design or construction of a security mechanism.
Shirey Informational [Page 267]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: This approach has long been discredited in cryptography,
where the phrase refers to trying to keep an algorithm secret,
rather than just concealing the keys [Schn]. One must assume that
mass-produced or widely fielded cryptographic devices eventually
will be lost or stolen and, therefore, that the algorithms will be
reverse engineered and become known to the adversary. Thus, one
should rely on only those algorithms and protocols that are strong
enough to have been published widely, and have been peer reviewed
for long enough that their flaws have been found and removed. For
example, NIST used a long, public process to select AES to replace
DES.
In computer and network security, the principle of "no security by
obscurity" also applies to security mechanisms other than
cryptography. For example, if the design and implementation of a
protocol for access control are strong, then reading the
protocol's source code should not enable you to find a way to
evade the protection and penetrate the system.
$ security class
(D) Synonym for "security level".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. Instead, use
"security level", which is more widely established and understood.
$ security clearance
(I) A determination that a person is eligible, under the standards
of a specific security policy, for authorization to access
sensitive information or other system resources. (See: clearance
level.)
$ security compromise
(I) A security violation in which a system resource is exposed, or
is potentially exposed, to unauthorized access. (Compare: data
compromise, exposure, violation.)
$ security controls
(N) The management, operational, and technical controls
(safeguards or countermeasures) prescribed for an information
system which, taken together, satisfy the specified security
requirements and adequately protect the confidentiality,
integrity, and availability of the system and its information.
[FP199] (See: security architecture.)
$ security doctrine
(I) A specified set of procedures or practices that direct or
provide guidance for how to comply with security policy. (Compare:
security mechanism, security policy.)
Shirey Informational [Page 268]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: Security policy and security doctrine are closely
related. However, policy deals mainly with strategy, and doctrine
deals with tactics.
Security doctrine is often understood to refer mainly to
administrative security, personnel security, and physical
security. For example, security mechanisms and devices that
implement them are normally designed to operate in a limited range
of environmental and administrative conditions, and these
conditions must be met to complement and ensure the technical
protection afforded by the hardware, firmware, and software in the
devices. Security doctrine specifies how to achieve those
conditions. (See: "first law" under "Courtney's laws".)
$ security domain
(I) See: domain.
$ security environment
(I) The set of external entities, procedures, and conditions that
affect secure development, operation, and maintenance of a system.
(See: "first law" under "Courtney's laws".)
$ security event
(I) An occurrence in a system that is relevant to the security of
the system. (See: security incident.)
Tutorial: The term covers both events that are security incidents
and those that are not. In a CA workstation, for example, a list
of security events might include the following:
- Logging an operator into or out of the system.
- Performing a cryptographic operation, e.g., signing a digital
certificate or CRL.
- Performing a cryptographic card operation: creation, insertion,
removal, or backup.
- Performing a digital certificate lifecycle operation: rekey,
renewal, revocation, or update.
- Posting a digital certificate to an X.500 Directory.
- Receiving a key compromise notification.
- Receiving an improper certification request.
- Detecting an alarm condition reported by a cryptographic
module.
- Failing a built-in hardware self-test or a software system
integrity check.
$ security fault analysis
(I) A security analysis, usually performed on hardware at the
level of gate logic, gate-by-gate, to determine the security
properties of a device when a hardware fault is encountered.
Shirey Informational [Page 269]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ security function
(I) A function in a system that is relevant to the security of the
system; i.e., a system function that must operate correctly to
ensure adherence to the system's security policy.
$ security gateway
1. (I) An internetwork gateway that separates trusted (or
relatively more trusted) hosts on one side from untrusted (or less
trusted) hosts on the other side. (See: firewall and guard.)
2. (O) /IPsec/ "An intermediate system that implements IPsec
protocols." [R4301]
Tutorial: IPsec's AH or ESP can be implemented on a gateway
between a protected network and an unprotected network, to provide
security services to the protected network's hosts when they
communicate across the unprotected network to other hosts and
gateways.
$ security incident
1. (I) A security event that involves a security violation. (See:
CERT, security event, security intrusion, security violation.)
Tutorial: In other words, a security event in which the system's
security policy is disobeyed or otherwise breached.
2. (D) "Any adverse event [that] compromises some aspect of
computer or network security." [R2350]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use definition 2 because
(a) a security incident may occur without actually being harmful
(i.e., adverse) and because (b) this Glossary defines "compromise"
more narrowly in relation to unauthorized access.
3. (D) "A violation or imminent threat of violation of computer
security policies, acceptable use policies, or standard computer
security practices." [SP61]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use definition 3 because
it mixes concepts in way that does not agree with common usage; a
security incident is commonly thought of as involving a
realization of a threat (see: threat action), not just a threat.
$ security intrusion
(I) A security event, or a combination of multiple security
events, that constitutes a security incident in which an intruder
gains, or attempts to gain, access to a system or system resource
without having authorization to do so.
Shirey Informational [Page 270]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ security kernel
(I) "The hardware, firmware, and software elements of a trusted
computing base that implement the reference monitor concept. It
must mediate all accesses, be protected from modification, and be
verifiable as correct." [NCS04] (See: kernel, TCB.)
Tutorial: A security kernel is an implementation of a reference
monitor for a given hardware base. [Huff]
$ security label
(I) An item of meta-data that designates the value of one or more
security-relevant attributes (e.g., security level) of a system
resource. (See: [R1457]. Compare: security marking.)
Deprecated usage: To avoid confusion, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use
"security label" for "security marking", or vice versa, even
though that is commonly done (including in some national and
international standards that should know better).
Tutorial: Humans and automated security mechanisms use a security
label of a system resource to determine, according to applicable
security policy, how to control access to the resource (and they
affix appropriate, matching security markings to physical
instances of the resource). Security labels are most often used to
support data confidentiality policy, and sometimes used to support
data integrity policy.
As explained in [R1457], the form that is taken by security labels
of a protocol's packets varies depending on the OSIRM layer in
which the protocol operates. Like meta-data generally, a security
label of a data packet may be either explicit (e.g., IPSO) or
implicit (e.g., Alice treats all messages received from Bob as
being labeled "Not For Public Release"). In a connectionless
protocol, every packet might have an explicit label; but in a
connection-oriented protocol, all packets might have the same
implicit label that is determined at the time the connection is
established.
Both classified and unclassified system resources may require a
security label. (See: FOUO.)
$ security level
(I) The combination of a hierarchical classification level and a
set of non-hierarchical category designations that represents how
sensitive a specified type or item of information is. (See:
dominate, lattice model. Compare: classification level.)
Shirey Informational [Page 271]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it.
The term is usually understood to involve sensitivity to
disclosure, but it also is used in many other ways and could
easily be misunderstood.
$ Security Level field
(I) A 16-bit field that specifies a security level value in the
security option (option type 130) of version 4 IP's datagram
header format.
Deprecated Abbreviation: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the abbreviation "S
field", which is potentially ambiguous.
$ security management infrastructure (SMI)
(I) System components and activities that support security policy
by monitoring and controlling security services and mechanisms,
distributing security information, and reporting security events.
Tutorial: The associated functions are as follows [I7498-4]:
- Controlling (granting or restricting) access to system
resources: This includes verifying authorizations and
identities, controlling access to sensitive security data, and
modifying access priorities and procedures in the event of
attacks.
- Retrieving (gathering) and archiving (storing) security
information: This includes logging security events and
analyzing the log, monitoring and profiling usage, and
reporting security violations.
- Managing and controlling the encryption process: This includes
performing the functions of key management and reporting on key
management problems. (See: PKI.)
$ security marking
(I) A physical marking that is bound to an instance of a system
resource and that represents a security label of the resource,
i.e., that names or designates the value of one or more security-
relevant attributes of the resource. (Compare: security label.)
Tutorial: A security label may be represented by various
equivalent markings depending on the physical form taken by the
labeled resource. For example, a document could have a marking
composed of a bit pattern [FP188] when the document is stored
electronically as a file in a computer, and also a marking of
printed alphabetic characters when the document is in paper form.
Shirey Informational [Page 272]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ security mechanism
(I) A method or process (or a device incorporating it) that can be
used in a system to implement a security service that is provided
by or within the system. (See: Tutorial under "security policy".
Compare: security doctrine.)
Usage: Usually understood to refer primarily to components of
communication security, computer security, and emanation security.
Examples: Authentication exchange, checksum, digital signature,
encryption, and traffic padding.
$ security model
(I) A schematic description of a set of entities and relationships
by which a specified set of security services are provided by or
within a system. Example: Bell-LaPadula model, OSIRM. (See:
Tutorial under "security policy".)
$ security parameters index (SPI)
1. (I) /IPsec/ A 32-bit identifier used to distinguish among
security associations that terminate at the same destination (IP
address) and use the same security protocol (AH or ESP). Carried
in AH and ESP to enable the receiving system to determine under
which security association to process a received packet.
2. (I) /mobile IP/ A 32-bit index identifying a security
association from among the collection of associations that are
available between a pair of nodes, for application to mobile IP
protocol messages that the nodes exchange.
$ security perimeter
(I) A physical or logical boundary that is defined for a domain or
enclave and within which a particular security policy or security
architecture applies. (See: insider, outsider.)
$ security policy
1. (I) A definite goal, course, or method of action to guide and
determine present and future decisions concerning security in a
system. [NCS03, R3198] (Compare: certificate policy.)
2a. (I) A set of policy rules (or principles) that direct how a
system (or an organization) provides security services to protect
sensitive and critical system resources. (See: identity-based
security policy, policy rule, rule-based security policy, rules of
behavior. Compare: security architecture, security doctrine,
security mechanism, security model, [R1281].)
Shirey Informational [Page 273]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2b. (O) A set of rules to administer, manage, and control access
to network resources. [R3060, R3198]
2c. (O) /X.509/ A set of rules laid down by an authority to govern
the use and provision of security services and facilities.
2d. (O) /Common Criteria/ A set of rules that regulate how assets
are managed, protected, and distributed within a TOE.
Tutorial: Ravi Sandhu suggests that security policy is one of four
layers of the security engineering process (as shown in the
following diagram). Each layer provides a different view of
security, ranging from what services are needed to how services
are implemented.
What Security Services
Should Be Provided? +- - - - - - - - - - - - -+
^ +- - - - - - - - - - - -| Mission Functions View |
| | Security Policy |- - - - - - - - - - - - -+
| +- - - - - - - - - - - -| Domain Practices View |
| | Security Model |- - - - - - - - - - - - -+
| +- - - - - - - - - - - -| Enclave Services View |
| | Security Architecture |- - - - - - - - - - - - -+
| +- - - - - - - - - - - -| Agent Mechanisms View |
| | Security Mechanism |- - - - - - - - - - - - -+
v +- - - - - - - - - - - -| Platform Devices View |
How Are Security +- - - - - - - - - - - - -+
Services Implemented?
We suggest that each of Sandhu's four layers is a mapping between
two points of view that differ in their degree of abstraction,
according to the perspectives of various participants in system
design, development, and operation activities, as follows:.
- Mission functions view: The perspective of a user of system
resources. States time-phased protection needs for resources
and identifies sensitive and critical resources -- networks,
hosts, applications, and databases. Independent of rules and
practices used to achieve protection.
- Domain practices view: The perspective of an enterprise manager
who sets protection standards for resources. States rules and
practices for protection. Identifies domain members; i.e.,
entities (users/providers) and resources (including data
objects). Independent of system topology. Not required to be
hierarchical.
- Enclave services view: The perspective of a system designer who
allocates security functions to major components. Assigns
security services to system topology structures and their
Shirey Informational [Page 274]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
contents. Independent of security mechanisms. Hierarchical
across all domains.
- Agent mechanisms view: The perspective of a system engineer who
specifies security mechanisms to implement security services.
Specifies mechanisms to be used by protocol, database, and
application engines. Independent of type and manufacture of
platforms and other physical devices.
- Platform devices view: The perspective of an as-built
description of the system in operation. Specifies exactly how
to build or assemble the system, and also specifies procedures
for operating the system.
$ Security Policy Database (SPD)
(I) /IPsec/ In an IPsec implementation operating in a network
node, a database that contains parameters that specify policies
set by a user or administrator to determine what IPsec services,
if any, are to be provided to IP datagrams sent or received by the
node, and in what fashion they are provided. For each datagram,
the SPD specifies one of three choices: discard the datagram,
apply IPsec services (e.g., AH or ESP), or bypass IPsec. Separate
inbound and outbound SPDs are needed because of the directionality
of IPsec security associations. [R4301] (Compare: SAD.)
$ Security Protocol 3 (SP3)
(O) A protocol [SDNS3] developed by SDNS to provide connectionless
data security at the top of OSIRM Layer 3. (Compare: IPsec, NLSP.)
$ Security Protocol 4 (SP4)
(O) A protocol [SDNS4] developed by SDNS to provide either
connectionless or end-to-end connection-oriented data security at
the bottom of OSIRM Layer 4. (See: TLSP.)
$ security-relevant event
(D) Synonym for "security event".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is wordy.
$ security-sensitive function
(D) Synonym for "security function".
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is wordy.
$ security service
1. (I) A processing or communication service that is provided by a
system to give a specific kind of protection to system resources.
(See: access control service, audit service, availability service,
data confidentiality service, data integrity service, data origin
Shirey Informational [Page 275]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
authentication service, non-repudiation service, peer entity
authentication service, system integrity service.)
Tutorial: Security services implement security policies, and are
implemented by security mechanisms.
2. (O) "A service, provided by a layer of communicating open
systems, [that] ensures adequate security of the systems or the
data transfers." [I7498-2]
$ security situation
(I) /ISAKMP/ The set of all security-relevant information (e.g.,
network addresses, security classifications, manner of operation
such as normal or emergency) that is needed to decide the security
services that are required to protect the association that is
being negotiated.
$ security target
(N) /Common Criteria/ A set of security requirements and
specifications to be used as the basis for evaluation of an
identified TOE.
Tutorial: A security target (ST) is a statement of security claims
for a particular information technology security product or
system, and is the basis for agreement among all parties as to
what security the product or system offers. An ST parallels the
structure of a protection profile, but has additional elements
that include product-specific detailed information. An ST contains
a summary specification, which defines the specific measures taken
in the product or system to meet the security requirements.
$ security token
(I) See: token.
$ security violation
(I) An act or event that disobeys or otherwise breaches security
policy. (See: compromise, penetration, security incident.)
$ seed
(I) A value that is an input to a pseudorandom number generator.
$ selective-field confidentiality
(I) A data confidentiality service that preserves confidentiality
for one or more parts (i.e., fields) of each packet. (See:
selective-field integrity.)
Tutorial: Data confidentiality service usually is applied to
entire SDUs, but some situations might require protection of only
Shirey Informational [Page 276]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
part of each packet. For example, when Alice uses a debit card at
an automated teller machine (ATM), perhaps only her PIN is
enciphered for confidentiality when her transaction request is
transmitted from the ATM to her bank's computer.
In any given operational situation, there could be many different
reasons for using selective field confidentiality. In the ATM
example, there are at least four possibilities: The service may
provide a fail-safe mode of operation, ensuring that the bank can
still process transactions (although with some risk) even when the
encryption system fails. It may make messages easier to work with
when doing system fault isolation. It may avoid problems with laws
that prevent shipping enciphered data across international
borders. It may improve efficiency by reducing processing load at
a central computer site.
$ selective-field integrity
(I) A data integrity service that preserves integrity for one or
more parts (i.e., fields) of each packet. (See: selective-field
confidentiality.)
Tutorial: Data integrity service may be implemented in a protocol
to protect the SDU part of packets, the PCI part, or both.
- SDU protection: When service is provided for SDUs, it usually
is applied to entire SDUs, but it might be applied only to
parts of SDUs in some situations. For example, an IPS
Application-Layer protocol might need protection of only part
of each packet, and this might enable faster processing.
- PCI protection: To prevent active wiretapping, it might be
desirable to apply data integrity service to the entire PCI,
but some PCI fields in some protocols need to be mutable in
transit. For example, the "Time to Live" field in IPv4 is
changed each time a packet passes through a router in the
Internet Layer. Thus, the value that the field will have when
the packet arrives at its destination is not predictable by the
sender and cannot be included in a checksum computed by the
sender. (See: Authentication Header.)
$ self-signed certificate
(I) A public-key certificate for which the public key bound by the
certificate and the private key used to sign the certificate are
components of the same key pair, which belongs to the signer.
(Compare: root certificate.)
Tutorial: In a self-signed X.509 public-key certificate, the
issuer's DN is the same as the subject's DN.
Shirey Informational [Page 277]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ semantic security
(I) An attribute of an encryption algorithm that is a
formalization of the notion that the algorithm not only hides the
plain text but also reveals no partial information about the plain
text; i.e., whatever is computable about the plain text when given
the cipher text, is also computable without the cipher text.
(Compare: indistinguishability.)
$ semiformal
(I) Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined
semantics. [CCIB] (Compare: formal, informal.)
$ sensitive
(I) A condition of a system resource such that the loss of some
specified property of that resource, such as confidentiality or
integrity, would adversely affect the interests or business of its
owner or user. (See: sensitive information. Compare: critical.)
$ sensitive compartmented information (SCI)
(O) /U.S. Government/ Classified information concerning or derived
from intelligence sources, methods, or analytical processes, which
is required to be handled within formal control systems
established by the Director of Central Intelligence. [C4009] (See:
compartment, SAP, SCIF. Compare: collateral information.)
$ sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF)
(O) /U.S. Government/ "An accredited area, room, group of rooms,
building, or installation where SCI may be stored, used,
discussed, and/or processed." [C4009] (See: SCI. Compare: shielded
enclosure.)
$ sensitive information
1. (I) Information for which (a) disclosure, (b) alteration, or
(c) destruction or loss could adversely affect the interests or
business of its owner or user. (See: data confidentiality, data
integrity, sensitive. Compare: classified, critical.)
2. (O) /U.S. Government/ Information for which (a) loss, (b)
misuse, (c) unauthorized access, or (d) unauthorized modification
could adversely affect the national interest or the conduct of
federal programs, or the privacy to which individuals are entitled
under the Privacy Act of 1974, but that has not been specifically
authorized under criteria established by an Executive Order or an
Act of Congress to be kept classified in the interest of national
defense or foreign policy.
Tutorial: Systems that are not U.S. national security systems, but
contain sensitive U.S. Federal Government information, must be
Shirey Informational [Page 278]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
protected according to the Computer Security Act of 1987 (Public
Law 100-235). (See: national security.)
$ sensitivity label
(D) Synonym for "classification label".
Deprecated term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because the
definition of "sensitive" involves not only data confidentiality,
but also data integrity.
$ sensitivity level
(D) Synonym for "classification level".
Deprecated term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because the
definition of "sensitive" involves not only data confidentiality,
but also data integrity.
$ separation of duties
(I) The practice of dividing the steps in a system process among
different individual entities (i.e., different users or different
roles) so as to prevent a single entity acting alone from being
able to subvert the process. Usage: a.k.a. "separation of
privilege". (See: administrative security, dual control.)
$ serial number
See: certificate serial number.
$ Serpent
(O) A symmetric, 128-bit block cipher designed by Ross Anderson,
Eli Biham, and Lars Knudsen as a candidate for the AES.
$ server
(I) A system entity that provides a service in response to
requests from other system entities called clients.
$ service data unit (SDU)
(N) See: secondary definition under "protocol data unit".
$ session
1a. (I) /computer usage/ A continuous period of time, usually
initiated by a login, during which a user accesses a computer
system.
1b. (I) /computer activity/ The set of transactions or other
computer activities that are performed by or for a user during a
period of computer usage.
Shirey Informational [Page 279]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
2. (I) /access control/ A temporary mapping of a principal to one
or more roles. (See: role-based access control.)
Tutorial: A user establishes a session as a principal and
activates some subset of roles to which the principal has been
assigned. The authorizations available to the principal in the
session are the union of the permissions of all the roles
activated in the session. Each session is associated with a single
principal and, therefore, with a single user. A principal may have
multiple, concurrent sessions and may activate a different set of
roles in each session.
3. (I) /computer network/ A persistent but (normally) temporary
association between a user agent (typically a client) and a second
process (typically a server). The association may persist across
multiple exchanges of data, including multiple connections.
(Compare: security association.)
$ session key
(I) In the context of symmetric encryption, a key that is
temporary or is used for a relatively short period of time. (See:
ephemeral, KDC, session. Compare: master key.)
Tutorial: A session key is used for a defined period of
communication between two system entities or components, such as
for the duration of a single connection or transaction set; or the
key is used in an application that protects relatively large
amounts of data and, therefore, needs to be rekeyed frequently.
$ SET(trademark)
(O) See: SET Secure Electronic Transaction(trademark).
$ SET private extension
(O) One of the private extensions defined by SET for X.509
certificates. Carries information about hashed root key,
certificate type, merchant data, cardholder certificate
requirements, encryption support for tunneling, or message support
for payment instructions.
$ SET qualifier
(O) A certificate policy qualifier that provides information about
the location and content of a SET certificate policy.
Tutorial: Besides the policies and qualifiers inherited from its
own certificate, each CA in the SET certification hierarchy may
add one qualifying statement to the root policy when the CA issues
a certificate. The additional qualifier is a certificate policy
for that CA. Each policy in a SET certificate may have these
Shirey Informational [Page 280]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
qualifiers: (a) a URL where a copy of the policy statement may be
found; (b) an electronic mail address where a copy of the policy
statement may be found; (c) a hash result of the policy statement,
computed using the indicated algorithm; and (d) a statement
declaring any disclaimers associated with the issuing of the
certificate.
$ SET Secure Electronic Transaction(trademark) or SET(trademark)
(N) A protocol developed jointly by MasterCard International and
Visa International and published as an open standard to provide
confidentiality of transaction information, payment integrity, and
authentication of transaction participants for payment card
transactions over unsecured networks, such as the Internet. [SET1]
(See: acquirer, brand, cardholder, dual signature, electronic
commerce, IOTP, issuer, merchant, payment gateway, third party.)
Tutorial: This term and acronym are trademarks of SETCo.
MasterCard and Visa announced the SET standard on 1 February 1996.
$ SETCo
(O) Abbreviation of "SET Secure Electronic Transaction LLC",
formed on 19 December 1997 by MasterCard and Visa for implementing
the SET Secure Electronic Transaction(trademark) standard. A later
memorandum of understanding added American Express and JCB Credit
Card Company as co-owners of SETCo.
$ SHA, SHA-1, SHA-2
(N) See: Secure Hash Algorithm.
$ shared identity
(I) See: secondary definition under "identity".
$ shared secret
(D) Synonym for "cryptographic key" or "password".
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the term is used in many ways and could
easily be misunderstood.
$ shielded enclosure
(O) "Room or container designed to attenuate electromagnetic
radiation, acoustic signals, or emanations." [C4009] (See:
emanation. Compare: SCIF.)
$ short title
(O) "Identifying combination of letters and numbers assigned to
certain items of COMSEC material to facilitate handling,
accounting, and controlling." [C4009] (Compare: KMID, long title.)
Shirey Informational [Page 281]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ shroud
(D) /verb/ To encrypt a private key, possibly in concert with a
policy that prevents the key from ever being available in
cleartext form beyond a certain, well-defined security perimeter.
[PKC12] (See: encrypt. Compare: seal, wrap.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as defined here;
the definition duplicates the meaning of other, standard terms.
Instead, use "encrypt" or other terminology that is specific with
regard to the mechanism being used.
$ SHS
(N) See: Secure Hash Standard.
$ sign
(I) Create a digital signature for a data object. (See: signer.)
$ signal analysis
(I) Gaining indirect knowledge (inference) of communicated data by
monitoring and analyzing a signal that is emitted by a system and
that contains the data but is not intended to communicate the
data. (See: emanation. Compare: traffic analysis.)
$ signal intelligence
(I) The science and practice of extracting information from
signals. (See: signal security.)
$ signal security
(N) (I) The science and practice of protecting signals. (See:
cryptology, security.)
Tutorial: The term "signal" denotes (a) communication in almost
any form and also (b) emanations for other purposes, such as
radar. Signal security is opposed by signal intelligence, and each
discipline includes opposed sub-disciplines as follows [Kahn]:
Signal Security Signal Intelligence
------------------------------ ---------------------------------
1. Communication Security 1. Communication Intelligence
1a. Cryptography 1a. Cryptanalysis
1b. Traffic Security 1b. Traffic Analysis
1c. Steganography 1c. Detection and Interception
2. Electronic Security 2. Electronic Intelligence
2a. Emission Security 2a. Electronic Reconnaissance
2b. Counter-Countermeasures 2b. Countermeasures
------------------------------ ---------------------------------
Shirey Informational [Page 282]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ signature
(O) A symbol or process adopted or executed by a system entity
with present intention to declare that a data object is genuine.
(See: digital signature, electronic signature.)
$ signature certificate
(I) A public-key certificate that contains a public key that is
intended to be used for verifying digital signatures, rather than
for encrypting data or performing other cryptographic functions.
Tutorial: A v3 X.509 public-key certificate may have a "keyUsage"
extension that indicates the purpose for which the certified
public key is intended. (See: certificate profile.)
$ signed receipt
(I) An S/MIME service [R2634] that (a) provides, to the originator
of a message, proof of delivery of the message and (b) enables the
originator to demonstrate to a third party that the recipient was
able to verify the signature of the original message.
Tutorial: The receipt is bound to the original message by a
signature; consequently, the service may be requested only for a
message that is signed. The receipt sender may optionally also
encrypt the receipt to provide confidentiality between the receipt
sender and the receipt recipient.
$ signer
(N) A human being or organization entity that uses a private key
to sign (i.e., create a digital signature on) a data object. [DSG]
$ SILS
(N) See: Standards for Interoperable LAN/MAN Security.
$ simple authentication
1. (I) An authentication process that uses a password as the
information needed to verify an identity claimed for an entity.
(Compare: strong authentication.)
2. (O) "Authentication by means of simple password arrangements."
[X509]
$ Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL)
(I) An Internet specification [R2222, R4422] for adding
authentication service to connection-based protocols. (Compare:
EAP, GSS-API.)
Shirey Informational [Page 283]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: To use SASL, a protocol includes a command for
authenticating a user to a server and for optionally negotiating
protection of subsequent protocol interactions. The command names
a registered security mechanism. SASL mechanisms include Kerberos,
GSS-API, S/KEY, and others. Some protocols that use SASL are IMAP4
and POP3.
$ Simple Key Management for Internet Protocols (SKIP)
(I) A key-distribution protocol that uses hybrid encryption to
convey session keys that are used to encrypt data in IP packets.
(See: SKIP reference in [R2356].)
Tutorial: SKIP was designed by Ashar Aziz and Whitfield Diffie at
Sun Microsystems and proposed as the standard key management
protocol for IPsec, but IKE was chosen instead. Although IKE is
mandatory for an IPsec implementation, the use of SKIP is not
excluded.
SKIP uses the Diffie-Hellman-Merkle algorithm (or could use
another key-agreement algorithm) to generate a key-encrypting key
for use between two entities. A session key is used with a
symmetric algorithm to encrypt data in one or more IP packets that
are to be sent from one entity to the other. A symmetric KEK is
established and used to encrypt the session key, and the encrypted
session key is placed in a SKIP header that is added to each IP
packet that is encrypted with that session key.
$ Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP)
(I) A TCP-based, Application-Layer, Internet Standard protocol
(RFC 821) for moving electronic mail messages from one computer to
another.
$ Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)
(I) A (usually) UDP-based, Application-Layer, Internet Standard
protocol (RFCs 3410-3418) for conveying management information
between system components that act as managers and agents.
$ Simple Public Key Infrastructure (SPKI)
(I) A set of experimental concepts (RFCs 2692, 2693) that were
proposed as alternatives to the concepts standardized in PKIX.
$ simple security property
(N) /formal model/ Property of a system whereby a subject has read
access to an object only if the clearance of the subject dominates
the classification of the object. See: Bell-LaPadula model.
Shirey Informational [Page 284]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ single sign-on
1. (I) An authentication subsystem that enables a user to access
multiple, connected system components (such as separate hosts on a
network) after a single login at only one of the components. (See:
Kerberos.)
2. (O) /Liberty Alliance/ A security subsystem that enables a user
identity to be authenticated at an identity provider -- i.e., at a
service that authenticates and asserts the user's identity -- and
then have that authentication be honored by other service
providers.
Tutorial: A single sign-on subsystem typically requires a user to
log in once at the beginning of a session, and then during the
session transparently grants access by the user to multiple,
separately protected hosts, applications, or other system
resources, without further login action by the user (unless, of
course, the user logs out). Such a subsystem has the advantages of
being user friendly and enabling authentication to be managed
consistently across an entire enterprise. Such a subsystem also
has the disadvantage of requiring all the accessed components to
depend on the security of the same authentication information.
$ singular identity
(I) See: secondary definition under "identity".
$ site
(I) A facility -- i.e., a physical space, room, or building
together with its physical, personnel, administrative, and other
safeguards -- in which system functions are performed. (See:
node.)
$ situation
(I) See: security situation.
$ SKEME
(I) A key-distribution protocol from which features were adapted
for IKE. [SKEME]
$ SKIP
(I) See: Simple Key Management for Internet Protocols.
$ SKIPJACK
(N) A type 2, 64-bit block cipher [SKIP, R2773] with a key size of
80 bits. (See: CAPSTONE, CLIPPER, FORTEZZA, Key Exchange
Algorithm.)
Shirey Informational [Page 285]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: SKIPJACK was developed by NSA and formerly classified at
the U.S. DoD "Secret" level. On 23 June 1998, NSA announced that
SKIPJACK had been declassified.
$ slot
(O) /MISSI/ One of the FORTEZZA PC card storage areas that are
each able to hold an X.509 certificate plus other data, including
the private key that is associated with a public-key certificate.
$ smart card
(I) A credit-card sized device containing one or more integrated
circuit chips that perform the functions of a computer's central
processor, memory, and input/output interface. (See: PC card,
smart token.)
Usage: Sometimes this term is used rather strictly to mean a card
that closely conforms to the dimensions and appearance of the kind
of plastic credit card issued by banks and merchants. At other
times, the term is used loosely to include cards that are larger
than credit cards, especially cards that are thicker, such as PC
cards.
$ smart token
(I) A device that conforms to the definition of "smart card"
except that rather than having the standard dimensions of a credit
card, the token is packaged in some other form, such as a military
dog tag or a door key. (See: smart card, cryptographic token.)
$ SMI
(I) See: security management infrastructure.
$ SMTP
(I) See: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol.
$ smurf attack
(D) /slang/ A denial-of-service attack that uses IP broadcast
addressing to send ICMP ping packets with the intent of flooding a
system. (See: fraggle attack, ICMP flood.)
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term.
Derivation: The Smurfs are a fictional race of small, blue
creatures that were created by a cartoonist. Perhaps the inventor
of this attack thought that a swarm of ping packets resembled a
gang of smurfs. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
Shirey Informational [Page 286]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: The attacker sends ICMP echo request ("ping") packets
that appear to originate not from the attacker's own IP address,
but from the address of the host or router that is the target of
the attack. Each packet is addressed to an IP broadcast address,
e.g., to all IP addresses in a given network. Thus, each echo
request that is sent by the attacker results in many echo
responses being sent to the target address. This attack can
disrupt service at a particular host, at the hosts that depend on
a particular router, or in an entire network.
$ sneaker net
(D) /slang/ A process that transfers data between systems only
manually, under human control; i.e., a data transfer process that
involves an air gap.
Deprecated Term: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term.
$ Snefru
(N) A public-domain, cryptographic hash function (a.k.a. "The
Xerox Secure Hash Function") designed by Ralph C. Merkle at Xerox
Corporation. Snefru can produce either a 128-bit or 256-bit output
(i.e., hash result). [Schn] (See: Khafre, Khufu.)
$ sniffing
(D) /slang/ Synonym for "passive wiretapping"; most often refers
to capturing and examining the data packets carried on a LAN.
(See: password sniffing.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it unnecessarily
duplicates the meaning of a term that is better established. (See:
Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".
$ SNMP
(I) See: Simple Network Management Protocol.
$ social engineering
(D) Euphemism for non-technical or low-technology methods, often
involving trickery or fraud, that are used to attack information
systems. Example: phishing.
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is too vague.
Instead, use a term that is specific with regard to the means of
attack, e.g., blackmail, bribery, coercion, impersonation,
intimidation, lying, or theft.
Shirey Informational [Page 287]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ SOCKS
(I) An Internet protocol [R1928] that provides a generalized proxy
server that enables client-server applications (e.g., TELNET, FTP,
or HTTP; running over either TCP or UDP) to use the services of a
firewall.
Tutorial: SOCKS is layered under the IPS Application Layer and
above the Transport Layer. When a client inside a firewall wishes
to establish a connection to an object that is reachable only
through the firewall, it uses TCP to connect to the SOCKS server,
negotiates with the server for the authentication method to be
used, authenticates with the chosen method, and then sends a relay
request. The SOCKS server evaluates the request, typically based
on source and destination addresses, and either establishes the
appropriate connection or denies it.
$ soft TEMPEST
(O) The use of software techniques to reduce the radio frequency
information leakage from computer displays and keyboards. [Kuhn]
(See: TEMPEST.)
$ soft token
(D) A data object that is used to control access or authenticate
authorization. (See: token.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as defined here;
the definition duplicates the meaning of other, standard terms.
Instead, use "attribute certificate" or another term that is
specific with regard to the mechanism being used.
$ software
(I) Computer programs (which are stored in and executed by
computer hardware) and associated data (which also is stored in
the hardware) that may be dynamically written or modified during
execution. (Compare: firmware.)
$ software error
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definitions under "corruption",
"exposure", and "incapacitation".
$ SORA
(O) See: SSO-PIN ORA.
$ source authentication
(D) Synonym for "data origin authentication" or "peer entity
authentication". (See: data origin authentication, peer entity
authentication).
Shirey Informational [Page 288]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because it is
ambiguous and, in either meaning, duplicates the meaning of
internationally standardized terms. If the intent is to
authenticate the original creator or packager of data received,
then use "data origin authentication". If the intent is to
authenticate the identity of the sender of data in the current
instance, then use "peer entity authentication".
$ source integrity
(I) The property that data is trustworthy (i.e., worthy of
reliance or trust), based on the trustworthiness of its sources
and the trustworthiness of any procedures used for handling data
in the system. Usage: a.k.a. Biba integrity. (See: integrity.
Compare: correctness integrity, data integrity.)
Tutorial: For this kind of integrity, there are formal models of
unauthorized modification (see: Biba model) that logically
complement the more familiar models of unauthorized disclosure
(see: Bell-LaPadula model). In these models, objects are labeled
to indicate the credibility of the data they contain, and there
are rules for access control that depend on the labels.
$ SP3
(O) See: Security Protocol 3.
$ SP4
(O) See: Security Protocol 4.
$ spam
1a. (I) /slang verb/ To indiscriminately send unsolicited,
unwanted, irrelevant, or inappropriate messages, especially
commercial advertising in mass quantities.
1b. (I) /slang noun/ Electronic "junk mail". [R2635]
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term in uppercase
letters, because SPAM(trademark) is a trademark of Hormel Foods
Corporation. Hormel says, "We do not object to use of this slang
term [spam] to describe [unsolicited advertising email], although
we do object to the use of our product image in association with
that term. Also, if the term is to be used, it SHOULD be used in
all lower-case letters to distinguish it from our trademark SPAM,
which SHOULD be used with all uppercase letters." (See: metadata.)
Tutorial: In sufficient volume, spam can cause denial of service.
(See: flooding.) According to Hormel, the term was adopted as a
result of a Monty Python skit in which a group of Vikings sang a
chorus of 'SPAM, SPAM, SPAM ...' in an increasing crescendo,
Shirey Informational [Page 289]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
drowning out other conversation. This lyric became a metaphor for
the unsolicited advertising messages that threaten to overwhelm
other discourse on the Internet.
$ SPD
(I) See: Security Policy Database.
$ special access program (SAP)
(O) /U.S. Government/ "Sensitive program, [that is] approved in
writing by a head of agency with [i.e., who has] original top
secret classification authority, [and] that imposes need-to-know
and access controls beyond those normally provided for access to
Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret information. The level of
controls is based on the criticality of the program and the
assessed hostile intelligence threat. The program may be an
acquisition program, an intelligence program, or an operations and
support program." [C4009] (See: formal access approval, SCI.
Compare: collateral information.)
$ SPI
(I) See: Security Parameters Index.
$ SPKI
(I) See: Simple Public Key Infrastructure.
$ split key
(I) A cryptographic key that is generated and distributed as two
or more separate data items that individually convey no knowledge
of the whole key that results from combining the items. (See: dual
control, split knowledge.)
$ split knowledge
1. (I) A security technique in which two or more entities
separately hold data items that individually do not convey
knowledge of the information that results from combining the
items. (See: dual control, split key.)
2. (O) "A condition under which two or more entities separately
have key components [that] individually convey no knowledge of the
plaintext key [that] will be produced when the key components are
combined in the cryptographic module." [FP140]
$ spoof
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "masquerade".
$ spoofing attack
(I) Synonym for "masquerade attack".
Shirey Informational [Page 290]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ spread spectrum
(N) A TRANSEC technique that transmits a signal in a bandwidth
much greater than the transmitted information needs. [F1037]
Example: frequency hopping.
Tutorial: Usually uses a sequential, noise-like signal structure
to spread the normally narrowband information signal over a
relatively wide band of frequencies. The receiver correlates the
signals to retrieve the original information signal. This
technique decreases potential interference to other receivers,
while achieving data confidentiality and increasing immunity of
spread spectrum receivers to noise and interference.
$ spyware
(D) /slang/ Software that an intruder has installed
surreptitiously on a networked computer to gather data from that
computer and send it through the network to the intruder or some
other interested party. (See: malicious logic, Trojan horse.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the term is used in many ways and could
easily be misunderstood.
Tutorial: Some examples of the types of data that might be
gathered by spyware are application files, passwords, email
addresses, usage histories, and keystrokes. Some examples of
motivations for gathering the data are blackmail, financial fraud,
identity theft, industrial espionage, market research, and
voyeurism.
$ SSH(trademark)
(N) See: Secure Shell(trademark).
$ SSL
(I) See: Secure Sockets Layer.
$ SSO
(I) See: system security officer.
$ SSO PIN
(O) /MISSI/ One of two PINs that control access to the functions
and stored data of a FORTEZZA PC card. Knowledge of the SSO PIN
enables a card user to perform the FORTEZZA functions intended for
use by an end user and also the functions intended for use by a
MISSI CA. (See: user PIN.)
Shirey Informational [Page 291]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ SSO-PIN ORA (SORA)
(O) /MISSI/ A MISSI organizational RA that operates in a mode in
which the ORA performs all card management functions and,
therefore, requires knowledge of the SSO PIN for FORTEZZA PC cards
issued to end users.
$ Standards for Interoperable LAN/MAN Security (SILS)
1. (N) The IEEE 802.10 standards committee. (See: [FP191].)
2. (N) A set of IEEE standards, which has eight parts: (a) Model,
including security management, (b) Secure Data Exchange protocol,
(c) Key Management, (d) [has been incorporated in (a)], (e) SDE
Over Ethernet 2.0, (f) SDE Sublayer Management, (g) SDE Security
Labels, and (h) SDE PICS Conformance. Parts b, e, f, g, and h are
incorporated in IEEE Standard 802.10-1998.
$ star property
(N) See: *-property.
$ Star Trek attack
(D) /slang/ An attack that penetrates your system where no attack
has ever gone before.
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term; it is a joke for
Trekkies. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
$ static
(I) /adjective/ Refers to a cryptographic key or other parameter
that is relatively long-lived. (Compare: ephemeral.)
$ steganography
(I) Methods of hiding the existence of a message or other data.
This is different than cryptography, which hides the meaning of a
message but does not hide the message itself. Examples: For
classic, physical methods, see [Kahn]; for modern, digital
methods, see [John]. (See: cryptology. Compare: concealment
system, digital watermarking.)
$ storage channel
(I) See: covert storage channel.
$ storage key
(I) A cryptographic key used by a device for protecting
information that is being maintained in the device, as opposed to
protecting information that is being transmitted between devices.
(See: cryptographic token, token copy. Compare: traffic key.)
Shirey Informational [Page 292]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ stream cipher
(I) An encryption algorithm that breaks plain text into a stream
of successive elements (usually, bits) and encrypts the n-th
plaintext element with the n-th element of a parallel key stream,
thus converting the plaintext stream into a ciphertext stream.
[Schn] (See: block cipher.)
$ stream integrity service
(I) A data integrity service that preserves integrity for a
sequence of data packets, including both (a) bit-by-bit datagram
integrity of each individual packet in the set and (b) packet-by-
packet sequential integrity of the set as a whole. (See: data
integrity. Compare: datagram integrity service.)
Tutorial: Some internetwork applications need only datagram
integrity, but others require that an entire stream of packets be
protected against insertion, reordering, deletion, and delay:
- "Insertion": The destination receives an additional packet that
was not sent by the source.
- "Reordering": The destination receives packets in a different
order than that in which they were sent by the source.
- "Deletion": A packet sent by the source is not ever delivered
to the intended destination.
- "Delay": A packet is detained for some period of time at a
relay, thus hampering and postponing the packet's normal timely
delivery from source to destination.
$ strength
1. (I) /cryptography/ A cryptographic mechanism's level of
resistance to attacks [R3766]. (See: entropy, strong, work
factor.)
2. (N) /Common Criteria/ "Strength of function" is a
"qualification of a TOE security function expressing the minimum
efforts assumed necessary to defeat its expected security behavior
by directly attacking its underlying security mechanisms": (See:
strong.)
- Basic: "A level of the TOE strength of function where analysis
shows that the function provides adequate protection against
casual breach of TOE security by attackers possessing a low
attack potential."
- Medium: "... against straightforward or intentional breach ...
by attackers possessing a moderate attack potential."
- High: "... against deliberately planned or organized breach ...
by attackers possessing a high attack potential."
Shirey Informational [Page 293]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ strong
1. (I) /cryptography/ Used to describe a cryptographic algorithm
that would require a large amount of computational power to defeat
it. (See: strength, work factor, weak key.)
2. (I) /COMPUSEC/ Used to describe a security mechanism that would
be difficult to defeat. (See: strength, work factor.)
$ strong authentication
1. (I) An authentication process that uses a cryptographic
security mechanism -- particularly public-key certificates -- to
verify the identity claimed for an entity. (Compare: simple
authentication.)
2. (O) "Authentication by means of cryptographically derived
credentials." [X509]
$ subject
1a. (I) A process in a computer system that represents a principal
and that executes with the privileges that have been granted to
that principal. (Compare: principal, user.)
1b. (I) /formal model/ A system entity that causes information to
flow among objects or changes the system state; technically, a
process-domain pair. A subject may itself be an object relative to
some other subject; thus, the set of subjects in a system is a
subset of the set of objects. (See: Bell-LaPadula model, object.)
2. (I) /digital certificate/ The name (of a system entity) that is
bound to the data items in a digital certificate; e.g., a DN that
is bound to a key in a public-key certificate. (See: X.509.)
$ subject CA
(D) The CA that is the subject of a cross-certificate issued by
another CA. [X509] (See: cross-certification.)
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because it is not
widely known and could be misunderstood. Instead, say "the CA that
is the subject of the cross-certificate".
$ subnetwork
(N) An OSI term for a system of packet relays and connecting links
that implement OSIRM layer 2 or 3 to provide a communication
service that interconnects attached end systems. Usually, the
relays are all of the same type (e.g., X.25 packet switches, or
interface units in an IEEE 802.3 LAN). (See: gateway, internet,
router.)
Shirey Informational [Page 294]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ subordinate CA (SCA)
1. (I) A CA whose public-key certificate is issued by another
(superior) CA. (See: certification hierarchy. Compare: cross-
certification.)
2. (O) /MISSI/ The fourth-highest (i.e., bottom) level of a MISSI
certification hierarchy; a MISSI CA whose public-key certificate
is signed by a MISSI CA rather than by a MISSI PCA. A MISSI SCA is
the administrative authority for a subunit of an organization,
established when it is desirable to organizationally distribute or
decentralize the CA service. The term refers both to that
authoritative office or role, and to the person who fills that
office. A MISSI SCA registers end users and issues their
certificates and may also register ORAs, but may not register
other CAs. An SCA periodically issues a CRL.
$ subordinate DN
(I) An X.500 DN is subordinate to another X.500 DN if it begins
with a set of attributes that is the same as the entire second DN
except for the terminal attribute of the second DN (which is
usually the name of a CA). For example, the DN is subordinate to the DN
.
$ subscriber
(I) /PKI/ A user that is registered in a PKI and, therefore, can
be named in the "subject" field of a certificate issued by a CA in
that PKI. (See: registration, user.)
Usage: This term is needed to distinguish registered users from
two other kinds of PKI users:
- Users that access the PKI but are not identified to it: For
example, a relying party may access a PKI repository to obtain
the certificate of some other party. (See: access.)
- Users that do not access the PKI: For example, a relying party
(see: certificate user) may use a digital certificate that was
obtained from a database that is not part of the PKI that
issued the certificate.
$ substitution
1. (I) /cryptography/ A method of encryption in which elements of
the plain text retain their sequential position but are replaced
by elements of cipher text. (Compare: transposition.)
2. (I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under
"falsification".
Shirey Informational [Page 295]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ subsystem
(I) A collection of related system components that together
perform a system function or deliver a system service.
$ superencryption
(I) An encryption operation for which the plaintext input to be
transformed is the ciphertext output of a previous encryption
operation. (Compare: hybrid encryption.)
$ superuser
(I) /UNIX/ Synonym for "root".
$ survivability
(I) The ability of a system to remain in operation or existence
despite adverse conditions, including natural occurrences,
accidental actions, and attacks. (Compare: availability,
reliability.)
$ swIPe
(I) An encryption protocol for IP that provides confidentiality,
integrity, and authentication and can be used for both end-to-end
and intermediate-hop security. [Ioan] (Compare: IPsec.)
Tutorial: The swIPe protocol is an IP predecessor that is
concerned only with encryption mechanisms; policy and key
management are handled outside the protocol.
$ syllabary
(N) /encryption/ A list of individual letters, combinations of
letters, or syllables, with their equivalent code groups, used for
spelling out proper names or other unusual words that are not
present in the basic vocabulary (i.e., are not in the codebook) of
a code used for encryption.
$ symmetric cryptography
(I) A branch of cryptography in which the algorithms use the same
key for both of two counterpart cryptographic operations (e.g.,
encryption and decryption). (See: asymmetric cryptography.
Compare: secret-key cryptography.)
Tutorial: Symmetric cryptography has been used for thousands of
years [Kahn]. A modern example is AES.
Symmetric cryptography has a disadvantage compared to asymmetric
cryptography with regard to key distribution. For example, when
Alice wants to ensure confidentiality for data she sends to Bob,
she encrypts the data with a key, and Bob uses the same key to
decrypt. However, keeping the shared key secret entails both cost
Shirey Informational [Page 296]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
and risk when the key is distributed to both Alice and Bob. (See:
key distribution, key management.)
$ symmetric key
(I) A cryptographic key that is used in a symmetric cryptographic
algorithm. (See: symmetric cryptography.)
$ SYN flood
(I) A denial-of-service attack that sends a large number of TCP
SYN (synchronize) packets to a host with the intent of disrupting
the operation of that host. (See: blind attack, flooding.)
Tutorial: This attack seeks to exploit a vulnerability in the TCP
specification or in a TCP implementation. Normally, two hosts use
a three-way exchange of packets to establish a TCP connection: (a)
host 1 requests a connection by sending a SYN packet to host 2;
(b) host 2 replies by sending a SYN-ACK (acknowledgement) packet
to host 1; and (c) host 1 completes the connection by sending an
ACK packet to host 2. To attack host 2, host 1 can send a series
of TCP SYNs, each with a different phony source address. ([R2827]
discusses how to use packet filtering to prevent such attacks from
being launched from behind an Internet service provider's
aggregation point.) Host 2 treats each SYN as a request from a
separate host, replies to each with a SYN-ACK, and waits to
receive the matching ACKs. (The attacker can use random or
unreachable sources addresses in the SYN packets, or can use
source addresses that belong to third parties, that then become
secondary victims.)
For each SYN-ACK that is sent, the TCP process in host 2 needs
some memory space to store state information while waiting for the
matching ACK to be returned. If the matching ACK never arrives at
host 2, a timer associated with the pending SYN-ACK will
eventually expire and release the space. But if host 1 (or a
cooperating group of hosts) can rapidly send many SYNs to host 2,
host 2 will need to store state information for many pending SYN-
ACKs and may run out of space. This can prevent host 2 from
responding to legitimate connection requests from other hosts or
even, if there are flaws in host 2's TCP implementation, crash
when the available space is exhausted.
$ synchronization
(I) Any technique by which a receiving (decrypting) cryptographic
process attains an internal state that matches the transmitting
(encrypting) process, i.e., has the appropriate keying material to
process the cipher text and is correctly initialized to do so.
Shirey Informational [Page 297]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ system
(I) Synonym for "information system".
Usage: This is a generic definition, and is the one with which the
term is used in this Glossary. However, IDOCs that use the term,
especially IDOCs that are protocol specifications, SHOULD state a
more specific definition. Also, IDOCs that specify security
features, services, and assurances need to define which system
components and system resources are inside the applicable security
perimeter and which are outside. (See: security architecture.)
$ system architecture
(N) The structure of system components, their relationships, and
the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution
over time. [DoD10] (Compare: security architecture.)
$ system component
1. (I) A collection of system resources that (a) forms a physical
or logical part of the system, (b) has specified functions and
interfaces, and (c) is treated (e.g., by policies or
specifications) as existing independently of other parts of the
system. (See: subsystem.)
2. (O) /ITSEC/ An identifiable and self-contained part of a TOE.
Usage: Component is a relative term because components may be
nested; i.e., one component of a system may be a part of another
component of that system.
Tutorial: Components can be characterized as follows:
- A "physical component" has mass and takes up space.
- A "logical component" is an abstraction used to manage and
coordinate aspects of the physical environment, and typically
represents a set of states or capabilities of the system.
$ system entity
(I) An active part of a system -- a person, a set of persons
(e.g., some kind of organization), an automated process, or a set
of processes (see: subsystem) -- that has a specific set of
capabilities. (Compare: subject, user.)
$ system high
(I) The highest security level at which a system operates, or is
capable of operating, at a particular time or in a particular
environment. (See: system-high security mode.)
Shirey Informational [Page 298]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ system-high security mode
(I) A mode of system operation wherein all users having access to
the system possess all necessary authorizations (both security
clearance and formal access approval) for all data handled by the
system, but some users might not have need-to-know for all the
data. (See: /system operation/ under "mode", formal access
approval, protection level, security clearance.)
Usage: Usually abbreviated as "system-high mode". This mode was
defined in U.S. DoD policy that applied to system accreditation,
but the term is widely used outside the Government.
$ system integrity
1. (I) An attribute or quality "that a system has when it can
perform its intended function in a unimpaired manner, free from
deliberate or inadvertent unauthorized manipulation." [C4009,
NCS04] (See: recovery, system integrity service.)
2. (D) "Quality of an [information system] reflecting the logical
correctness and reliability of the operating system; the logical
completeness of the hardware and software implementing the
protection mechanisms; and the consistency of the data structures
and occurrence of the stored data." [from an earlier version of
C4009]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use definition 2 because
it mixes several concepts in a potentially misleading way.
Instead, IDOCs should use the term with definition 1 and,
depending on what is meant, couple the term with additional, more
specifically descriptive and informative terms, such as
"correctness", "reliability", and "data integrity".
$ system integrity service
(I) A security service that protects system resources in a
verifiable manner against unauthorized or accidental change, loss,
or destruction. (See: system integrity.)
$ system low
(I) The lowest security level supported by a system at a
particular time or in a particular environment. (Compare: system
high.)
$ system resource
(I) Data contained in an information system; or a service provided
by a system; or a system capacity, such as processing power or
communication bandwidth; or an item of system equipment (i.e.,
Shirey Informational [Page 299]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
hardware, firmware, software, or documentation); or a facility
that houses system operations and equipment. (See: system
component.)
$ system security officer (SSO)
(I) A person responsible for enforcement or administration of the
security policy that applies to a system. (Compare: manager,
operator.)
$ system user
(I) A system entity that consumes a product or service provided by
the system, or that accesses and employs system resources to
produce a product or service of the system. (See: access, [R2504].
Compare: authorized user, manager, operator, principal, privileged
user, subject, subscriber, system entity, unauthorized user.)
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it
because the term is used in many ways and could easily be
misunderstood:
- This term usually refers to an entity that has been authorized
to access the system, but the term sometimes is used without
regard for whether access is authorized.
- This term usually refers to a living human being acting either
personally or in an organizational role. However, the term also
may refer to an automated process in the form of hardware,
software, or firmware; to a set of persons; or to a set of
processes.
- IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the term to refer to a mixed set
containing both persons and processes. This exclusion is
intended to prevent situations that might cause a security
policy to be interpreted in two different and conflicting ways.
A system user can be characterized as direct or indirect:
- "Passive user": A system entity that is (a) outside the
system's security perimeter *and* (b) can receive output from
the system but cannot provide input or otherwise interact with
the system.
- "Active user": A system entity that is (a) inside the system's
security perimeter *or* (b) can provide input or otherwise
interact with the system.
$ TACACS
(I) See: Terminal Access Controller (TAC) Access Control System.
$ TACACS+
(I) A TCP-based protocol that improves on TACACS by separating the
functions of authentication, authorization, and accounting and by
encrypting all traffic between the network access server and
Shirey Informational [Page 300]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
authentication server. TACACS+ is extensible to allow any
authentication mechanism to be used with TACACS+ clients.
$ tamper
(I) Make an unauthorized modification in a system that alters the
system's functioning in a way that degrades the security services
that the system was intended to provide. (See: QUADRANT. Compare:
secondary definitions under "corruption" and "misuse".)
$ tamper-evident
(I) A characteristic of a system component that provides evidence
that an attack has been attempted on that component or system.
Usage: Usually involves physical evidence. (See: tamper.)
$ tamper-resistant
(I) A characteristic of a system component that provides passive
protection against an attack. (See: tamper.)
Usage: Usually involves physical means of protection.
$ tampering
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definitions under "corruption"
and "misuse".
$ target of evaluation (TOE)
(N) /Common Criteria/ An information technology product or system
that is the subject of a security evaluation, together with the
product's associated administrator and user documentation.
(Compare: protection profile.)
Tutorial: The security characteristics of the target of evaluation
(TOE) are described in specific terms by a corresponding security
target, or in more general terms by a protection profile. In
Common Criteria philosophy, it is important that a TOE be
evaluated against the specific set of criteria expressed in the
target. This evaluation consists of rigorous analysis and testing
performed by an accredited, independent laboratory. The scope of a
TOE evaluation is set by the EAL and other requirements specified
in the target. Part of this process is an evaluation of the target
itself, to ensure that it is correct, complete, and internally
consistent and can be used as the baseline for the TOE evaluation.
$ TCB
(N) See: trusted computing base.
$ TCC field
(I) See: Transmission Control Code field.
Shirey Informational [Page 301]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ TCG
(N) See: Trusted Computing Group.
$ TCP
(I) See: Transmission Control Protocol.
$ TCP/IP
(I) Synonym for "Internet Protocol Suite".
$ TCSEC
(N) See: Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria. (Compare:
TSEC.)
$ TDEA
(I) See: Triple Data Encryption Algorithm.
$ teardrop attack
(D) /slang/ A denial-of-service attack that sends improperly
formed IP packet fragments with the intent of causing the
destination system to fail.
Deprecated Term: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the term is often used imprecisely and
could easily be misunderstood. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green
Book".)
$ technical non-repudiation
(I) See: (secondary definition under) non-repudiation.
$ technical security
(I) Security mechanisms and procedures that are implemented in and
executed by computer hardware, firmware, or software to provide
automated protection for a system. (See: security architecture.
Compare: administrative security.)
$ Telecommunications Security Word System (TSEC)
(O) /U.S. Government/ A terminology for designating
telecommunication security equipment. (Compare: TCSEC.)
Tutorial: A TSEC designator has the following parts:
- Prefix "TSEC/" for items and systems, or suffix "/TSEC" for
assemblies. (Often omitted when the context is clear.)
- First letter, for function: "C" COMSEC equipment system, "G"
general purpose, "K" cryptographic, "H" crypto-ancillary, "M"
manufacturing, "N" noncryptographic, "S" special purpose.
- Second letter, for type or purpose: "G" key generation, "I"
data transmission, "L" literal conversion, "N" signal
conversion, "O" multipurpose, "P" materials production, "S"
Shirey Informational [Page 302]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
special purpose, "T" testing or checking, "U" television, "W"
teletypewriter, "X" facsimile, "Y" speech.
- Optional third letter, used only in designations of assemblies,
for type or purpose: "A" advancing, "B" base or cabinet, "C"
combining, "D" drawer or panel, "E" strip or chassis, "F" frame
or rack, "G" key generator, "H" keyboard, "I" translator or
reader, "J" speech processing, "K" keying or permuting, "L"
repeater, "M" memory or storage, "O" observation, "P" power
supply or converter, "R" receiver, "S" synchronizing, "T"
transmitter, "U" printer, "V" removable COMSEC component, "W"
logic programmer/programming, "X" special purpose.
- Model number, usually two or three digits, assigned
sequentially within each letter combination (e.g., KG-34, KG-
84).
- Optional suffix letter, used to designate a version. First
version has no letter, next version has "A" (e.g., KG-84, KG-
84A), etc.
$ TELNET
(I) A TCP-based, Application-Layer, Internet Standard protocol
(RFC 854) for remote login from one host to another.
$ TEMPEST
1. (N) Short name for technology and methods for protecting
against data compromise due to electromagnetic emanations from
electrical and electronic equipment. [Army, Russ] (See:
inspectable space, soft TEMPEST, TEMPEST zone. Compare: QUADRANT)
2. (O) /U.S. Government/ "Short name referring to investigation,
study, and control of compromising emanations from IS equipment."
[C4009]
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
"electromagnetic emanations security"; instead, use EMSEC. Also,
the term is NOT an acronym for Transient Electromagnetic Pulse
Surveillance Technology.
Tutorial: The U.S. Federal Government issues security policies
that (a) state specifications and standards for techniques to
reduce the strength of emanations from systems and reduce the
ability of unauthorized parties to receive and make use of
emanations and (b) state rules for applying those techniques.
Other nations presumably do the same.
$ TEMPEST zone
(O) "Designated area [i.e., a physical volume] within a facility
where equipment with appropriate TEMPEST characteristics ... may
Shirey Informational [Page 303]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
be operated." [C4009] (See: emanation security, TEMPEST. Compare:
control zone, inspectable space.)
Tutorial: The strength of an electromagnetic signal decreases in
proportion to the square of the distance between the source and
the receiver. Therefore, EMSEC for electromagnetic signals can be
achieved by a combination of (a) reducing the strength of
emanations to a defined level and (b) establishing around that
equipment an appropriately sized physical buffer zone from which
unauthorized entities are excluded. By making the zone large
enough, it is possible to limit the signal strength available to
entities outside the zone to a level lower than can be received
and read with known, state-of-the-art methods. Typically, the need
for and size of a TEMPEST zone established by a security policy
depends not only on the measured level of signal emitted by
equipment, but also on the perceived threat level in the
equipment's environment.
$ Terminal Access Controller (TAC) Access Control System (TACACS)
(I) A UDP-based authentication and access control protocol [R1492]
in which a network access server receives an identifier and
password from a remote terminal and passes them to a separate
authentication server for verification. (See: TACACS+.)
Tutorial: TACACS can provide service not only for network access
servers but also routers and other networked computing devices via
one or more centralized authentication servers. TACACS was
originally developed for ARPANET and has evolved for use in
commercial equipment.
$ TESS
(I) See: The Exponential Encryption System.
$ The Exponential Encryption System (TESS)
(I) A system of separate but cooperating cryptographic mechanisms
and functions for the secure authenticated exchange of
cryptographic keys, the generation of digital signatures, and the
distribution of public keys. TESS uses asymmetric cryptography,
based on discrete exponentiation, and a structure of self-
certified public keys. [R1824]
$ theft
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definitions under
"interception" and "misappropriation".
$ threat
1a. (I) A potential for violation of security, which exists when
there is an entity, circumstance, capability, action, or event
Shirey Informational [Page 304]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
that could cause harm. (See: dangling threat, INFOCON level,
threat action, threat agent, threat consequence. Compare: attack,
vulnerability.)
1b. (N) Any circumstance or event with the potential to adversely
affect a system through unauthorized access, destruction,
disclosure, or modification of data, or denial of service. [C4009]
(See: sensitive information.)
Usage: (a) Frequently misused with the meaning of either "threat
action" or "vulnerability". (b) In some contexts, "threat" is used
more narrowly to refer only to intelligent threats; for example,
see definition 2 below. (c) In some contexts, "threat" is used
more broadly to cover both definition 1 and other concepts, such
as in definition 3 below.
Tutorial: A threat is a possible danger that might exploit a
vulnerability. Thus, a threat may be intentional or not:
- "Intentional threat": A possibility of an attack by an
intelligent entity (e.g., an individual cracker or a criminal
organization).
- "Accidental threat": A possibility of human error or omission,
unintended equipment malfunction, or natural disaster (e.g.,
fire, flood, earthquake, windstorm, and other causes listed in
[FP031]).
The Common Criteria characterizes a threat in terms of (a) a
threat agent, (b) a presumed method of attack, (c) any
vulnerabilities that are the foundation for the attack, and (d)
the system resource that is attacked. That characterization agrees
with the definitions in this Glossary (see: diagram under
"attack").
2. (O) The technical and operational ability of a hostile entity
to detect, exploit, or subvert a friendly system and the
demonstrated, presumed, or inferred intent of that entity to
conduct such activity.
Tutorial: To be likely to launch an attack, an adversary must have
(a) a motive to attack, (b) a method or technical ability to make
the attack, and (c) an opportunity to appropriately access the
targeted system.
3. (D) "An indication of an impending undesirable event." [Park]
Deprecated Definition: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with
definition 3 because the definition is ambiguous; the definition
was intended to include the following three meanings:
Shirey Informational [Page 305]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- "Potential threat": A possible security violation; i.e., the
same as definition 1.
- "Active threat": An expression of intent to violate security.
(Context usually distinguishes this meaning from the previous
one.)
- "Accomplished threat" or "actualized threat": That is, a threat
action. Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use the term
"threat" with this meaning; instead, use "threat action".
$ threat action
(I) A realization of a threat, i.e., an occurrence in which system
security is assaulted as the result of either an accidental event
or an intentional act. (See: attack, threat, threat consequence.)
Tutorial: A complete security architecture deals with both
intentional acts (i.e., attacks) and accidental events [FP031].
(See: various kinds of threat actions defined under the four kinds
of "threat consequence".)
$ threat agent
(I) A system entity that performs a threat action, or an event
that results in a threat action.
$ threat analysis
(I) An analysis of the threat actions that might affect a system,
primarily emphasizing their probability of occurrence but also
considering their resulting threat consequences. Example: RFC
3833. (Compare: risk analysis.)
$ threat consequence
(I) A security violation that results from a threat action.
Tutorial: The four basic types of threat consequence are
"unauthorized disclosure", "deception", "disruption", and
"usurpation". (See main Glossary entries of each of these four
terms for lists of the types of threat actions that can result in
these consequences.)
$ thumbprint
1. (I) A pattern of curves formed by the ridges on the tip of a
thumb. (See: biometric authentication, fingerprint.)
2. (D) Synonym for some type of "hash result". (See: biometric
authentication. Compare: fingerprint.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with definition 2
because that meaning mixes concepts in a potentially misleading
way.
Shirey Informational [Page 306]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ ticket
(I) Synonym for "capability token".
Tutorial: A ticket is usually granted by a centralized access
control server (ticket-granting agent) to authorize access to a
system resource for a limited time. Tickets can be implemented
with either symmetric cryptography (see: Kerberos) or asymmetric
cryptography (see: attribute certificate).
$ tiger team
(O) A group of evaluators employed by a system's managers to
perform penetration tests on the system.
Deprecated Usage: It is likely that other cultures use different
metaphors for this concept. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. (See: Deprecated
Usage under "Green Book".)
$ time stamp
1. (I) /noun/ With respect to a data object, a label or marking in
which is recorded the time (time of day or other instant of
elapsed time) at which the label or marking was affixed to the
data object. (See: Time-Stamp Protocol.)
2. (O) /noun/ "With respect to a recorded network event, a data
field in which is recorded the time (time of day or other instant
of elapsed time) at which the event took place." [A1523]
Tutorial: A time stamp can be used as evidence to prove that a
data object existed (or that an event occurred) at or before a
particular time. For example, a time stamp might be used to prove
that a digital signature based on a private key was created while
the corresponding public-key certificate was valid, i.e., before
the certificate either expired or was revoked. Establishing this
proof would enable the certificate to be used after its expiration
or revocation, to verify a signature that was created earlier.
This kind of proof is required as part of implementing PKI
services, such as non-repudiation service, and long-term security
services, such as audit.
$ Time-Stamp Protocol
(I) An Internet protocol (RFC 3161) that specifies how a client
requests and receives a time stamp from a server for a data object
held by the client.
Tutorial: The protocol describes the format of (a) a request sent
to a time-stamp authority and (b) the response that is returned
containing a time stamp. The authority creates the stamp by
Shirey Informational [Page 307]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
concatenating (a) a hash value of the input data object with (b) a
UTC time value and other parameters (policy OID, serial number,
indication of time accuracy, nonce, DN of the authority, and
various extensions), and then signing that dataset with the
authority's private key as specified in CMS. Such an authority
typically would operate as a trusted third-party service, but
other operational models might be used.
$ timing channel
(I) See: covert timing channel.
$ TKEY
(I) A mnemonic referring to an Internet protocol (RFC 2930) for
establishing a shared secret key between a DNS resolver and a DNS
name server. (See: TSIG.)
$ TLS
(I) See: Transport Layer Security.
$ TLSP
(N) See: Transport Layer Security Protocol.
$ TOE
(N) See: target of evaluation.
$ token
1. (I) /cryptography/ See: cryptographic token. (Compare: dongle.)
2. (I) /access control/ An object that is used to control access
and is passed between cooperating entities in a protocol that
synchronizes use of a shared resource. Usually, the entity that
currently holds the token has exclusive access to the resource.
(See: capability token.)
Usage: This term is heavily overloaded in the computing
literature; therefore, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with any
definition other than 1 or 2.
3a. (D) /authentication/ A data object or a physical device used
to verify an identity in an authentication process.
3b. (D) /U.S. Government/ Something that the claimant in an
authentication process (i.e., the entity that claims an identity)
possesses and controls, and uses to prove the claim during the
verification step of the process. [SP63]
Deprecated usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with definitions
3a and 3b; instead, use more specifically descriptive and
Shirey Informational [Page 308]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
informative terms such as "authentication information" or
"cryptographic token", depending on what is meant.
NIST defines four types of claimant tokens for electronic
authentication in an information system [SP63]. IDOCs SHOULD NOT
use these four NIST terms; they mix concepts in potentially
confusing ways and duplicate the meaning of better-established
terms. These four terms can be avoided by using more specifically
descriptive terms as follows:
- NIST "hard token": A hardware device that contains a protected
cryptographic key. (This is a type of "cryptographic token",
and the key is a type of "authentication information".)
- NIST "one-time password device token": A personal hardware
device that generates one-time passwords. (One-time passwords
are typically generated cryptographically. Therefore, this is a
type of "cryptographic token", and the key is a type of
"authentication information".)
- NIST "soft token": A cryptographic key that typically is stored
on disk or some other magnetic media. (The key is a type of
"authentication information"; "authentication key" would be a
better description.)
- NIST "password token": A secret data value that the claimant
memorizes. (This is a "password" that is being used as
"authentication information".)
$ token backup
(I) A token management operation that stores sufficient
information in a database (e.g., in a CAW) to recreate or restore
a security token (e.g., a smart card) if it is lost or damaged.
$ token copy
(I) A token management operation that copies all the personality
information from one security token to another. However, unlike in
a token restore operation, the second token is initialized with
its own, different local security values such as PINs and storage
keys.
$ token management
(I) The process that includes initializing security tokens (e.g.,
"smart card"), loading data into the tokens, and controlling the
tokens during their lifecycle. May include performing key
management and certificate management functions; generating and
installing PINs; loading user personality data; performing card
backup, card copy, and card restore operations; and updating
firmware.
Shirey Informational [Page 309]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ token restore
(I) A token management operation that loads a security token with
data for the purpose of recreating (duplicating) the contents
previously held by that or another token. (See: recovery.)
$ token storage key
(I) A cryptographic key used to protect data that is stored on a
security token.
$ top CA
(I) Synonym for "root" in a certification hierarchy. (See: apex
trust anchor.)
$ top-level specification
(I) "A non-procedural description of system behavior at the most
abstract level; typically a functional specification that omits
all implementation details." [NCS04] (See: formal top-level
specification, Tutorial under "security policy".)
Tutorial: A top-level specification is at a level of abstraction
below "security model" and above "security architecture" (see:
Tutorial under "security policy").
A top-level specification may be descriptive or formal:
- "Descriptive top-level specification": One that is written in a
natural language like English or an informal design notation.
- "Formal top-level specification": One that is written in a
formal mathematical language to enable theorems to be proven
that show that the specification correctly implements a set of
formal requirements or a formal security model. (See:
correctness proof.)
$ TPM
(N) See: Trusted Platform Module.
$ traceback
(I) Identification of the source of a data packet. (See:
masquerade, network weaving.)
$ tracker
(N) An attack technique for achieving unauthorized disclosure from
a statistical database. [Denns] (See: Tutorial under "inference
control".)
$ traffic analysis
1. (I) Gaining knowledge of information by inference from
observable characteristics of a data flow, even if the information
is not directly available (e.g., when the data is encrypted).
Shirey Informational [Page 310]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
These characteristics include the identities and locations of the
source(s) and destination(s) of the flow, and the flow's presence,
amount, frequency, and duration of occurrence. The object of the
analysis might be information in SDUs, information in the PCI, or
both. (See: inference, traffic-flow confidentiality, wiretapping.
Compare: signal analysis.)
2. (O) "The inference of information from observation of traffic
flows (presence, absence, amount, direction, and frequency)."
[I7498-2]
$ traffic-flow analysis
(I) Synonym for "traffic analysis".
$ traffic-flow confidentiality (TFC)
1. (I) A data confidentiality service to protect against traffic
analysis. (See: communications cover.)
2. (O) "A confidentiality service to protect against traffic
analysis." [I7498-2]
Tutorial: Confidentiality concerns involve both direct and
indirect disclosure of data, and the latter includes traffic
analysis. However, operational considerations can make TFC
difficult to achieve. For example, if Alice sends a product idea
to Bob in an email message, she wants data confidentiality for the
message's content, and she might also want to conceal the
destination of the message to hide Bob's identity from her
competitors. However, the identity of the intended recipient, or
at least a network address for that recipient, needs to be made
available to the mail system. Thus, complex forwarding schemes may
be needed to conceal the ultimate destination as the message
travels through the open Internet (see: onion routing).
Later, if Alice uses an ATM during a clandestine visit to
negotiate with Bob, she might prefer that her bank conceal the
origin of her transaction, because knowledge of the ATM's location
might allow a competitor to infer Bob's identity. The bank, on the
other hand, might prefer to protect only Alice's PIN (see:
selective-field confidentiality).
A TFC service can be either full or partial:
- "Full TFC": This type of service conceals all traffic
characteristics.
- "Partial TFC": This type of service either (a) conceals some
but not all of the characteristics or (b) does not completely
conceal some characteristic.
Shirey Informational [Page 311]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
On point-to-point data links, full TFC can be provided by
enciphering all PDUs and also generating a continuous, random data
stream to seamlessly fill all gaps between PDUs. To a wiretapper,
the link then appears to be carrying an unbroken stream of
enciphered data. In other cases -- including on a shared or
broadcast medium, or end-to-end in a network -- only partial TFC
is possible, and that may require a combination of techniques. For
example, a LAN that uses "carrier sense multiple access with
collision detection" (CSMA/CD; a.k.a. "listen while talk") to
control access to the medium, relies on detecting intervals of
silence, which prevents using full TFC. Partial TFC can be
provided on that LAN by measures such as adding spurious PDUs,
padding PDUs to a constant size, or enciphering addresses just
above the Physical Layer; but these measures reduce the efficiency
with which the LAN can carry traffic. At higher protocol layers,
SDUs can be protected, but addresses and other items of PCI must
be visible at the layers below.
$ traffic key
(I) A cryptographic key used by a device for protecting
information that is being transmitted between devices, as opposed
to protecting information that being is maintained in the device.
(Compare: storage key.)
$ traffic padding
(I) "The generation of spurious instances of communication,
spurious data units, and/or spurious data within data units."
[I7498-2]
$ tranquility property
(N) /formal model/ Property of a system whereby the security level
of an object cannot change while the object is being processed by
the system. (See: Bell-LaPadula model.)
$ transaction
1. (I) A unit of interaction between an external entity and a
system, or between components within a system, that involves a
series of system actions or events.
2. (O) "A discrete event between user and systems that supports a
business or programmatic purpose." [M0404]
Tutorial: To maintain secure state, transactions need to be
processed coherently and reliably. Usually, they need to be
designed to be atomic, consistent, isolated, and durable [Gray]:
- "Atomic": All actions and events that comprise the transaction
are guaranteed to be completed successfully, or else the result
is as if none at all were executed.
Shirey Informational [Page 312]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- "Consistent": The transaction satisfies correctness constraints
defined for the data that is being processed.
- "Isolated": If two transactions are performed concurrently,
they do not interfere with each other, and it appears as though
the system performs one at a time.
- "Durable": System state and transaction semantics survive
system failures.
$ TRANSEC
(I) See: transmission security.
$ Transmission Control Code field (TCC field)
(I) A data field that provides a means to segregate traffic and
define controlled communities of interest in the security option
(option type = 130) of IPv4's datagram header format. The TCC
values are alphanumeric trigraphs assigned by the U.S. Government
as specified in RFC 791.
$ Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
(I) An Internet Standard, Transport-Layer protocol (RFC 793) that
reliably delivers a sequence of datagrams from one computer to
another in a computer network. (See: TCP/IP.)
Tutorial: TCP is designed to fit into a layered suite of protocols
that support internetwork applications. TCP assumes it can obtain
a simple but potentially unreliable end-to-end datagram service
(such as IP) from the lower-layer protocols.
$ transmission security (TRANSEC)
(I) COMSEC measures that protect communications from interception
and exploitation by means other than cryptanalysis. Example:
frequency hopping. (Compare: anti-jam, traffic flow
confidentiality.)
$ Transport Layer
See: Internet Protocol Suite, OSIRM.
$ Transport Layer Security (TLS)
(I) TLS is an Internet protocol [R4346] that is based on, and very
similar to, SSL Version 3.0. (Compare: TLSP.)
Tutorial: The TLS protocol is misnamed. The name misleadingly
suggests that TLS is situated in the IPS Transport Layer, but TLS
is always layered above a reliable Transport-Layer protocol
(usually TCP) and either layered immediately below or integrated
with an Application-Layer protocol (often HTTP).
Shirey Informational [Page 313]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Transport Layer Security Protocol (TLSP)
(N) An end-to-end encryption protocol (ISO 10736) that provides
security services at the bottom of OSIRM Layer 4, i.e., directly
above Layer 3. (Compare: TLS.)
Tutorial: TLSP evolved directly from SP4.
$ transport mode
(I) One of two ways to apply AH or ESP to protect data packets; in
this mode, the IPsec protocol encapsulates (i.e., the protection
applies to) the packets of an IPS Transport-Layer protocol (e.g.,
TCP, UDP), which normally is carried directly above IP in an IPS
protocol stack. (Compare: tunnel mode.)
Tutorial: An IPsec transport-mode security association is always
between two hosts; neither end has the role of a security gateway.
Whenever either end of an IPsec security association is a security
gateway, the association is required to be in tunnel mode.
$ transposition
(I) /cryptography/ A method of encryption in which elements of the
plain text retain their original form but undergo some change in
their sequential position. (Compare: substitution.)
$ trap door
(I) Synonym for "back door".
$ trespass
(I) /threat action/ See: secondary definition under "intrusion".
$ Triple Data Encryption Algorithm
(I) A block cipher that transforms each 64-bit plaintext block by
applying the DEA three successive times, using either two or three
different keys for an effective key length of 112 or 168 bits.
[A9052, SP67]
Example: A variation proposed for IPsec's ESP uses a 168-bit key,
consisting of three independent 56-bit values used by the DEA, and
a 64-bit initialization vector. Each datagram contains an IV to
ensure that each received datagram can be decrypted even when
other datagrams are dropped or a sequence of datagrams is
reordered in transit. [R1851]
$ triple-wrapped
(I) /S-MIME/ Data that has been signed with a digital signature,
then encrypted, and then signed again. [R2634]
Shirey Informational [Page 314]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Trojan horse
(I) A computer program that appears to have a useful function, but
also has a hidden and potentially malicious function that evades
security mechanisms, sometimes by exploiting legitimate
authorizations of a system entity that invokes the program. (See:
malware, spyware. Compare: logic bomb, virus, worm.)
$ trust
1. (I) /information system/ A feeling of certainty (sometimes
based on inconclusive evidence) either (a) that the system will
not fail or (b) that the system meets its specifications (i.e.,
the system does what it claims to do and does not perform unwanted
functions). (See: trust level, trusted system, trustworthy system.
Compare: assurance.)
Tutorial: Components of a system can be grouped into three classes
of trust [Gass]:
- "Trusted": The component is responsible for enforcing security
policy on other components; the system's security depends on
flawless operation of the component. (See: trusted process.)
- "Benign": The component is not responsible for enforcing
security policy, but it has sensitive authorizations. It must
be trusted not to intentionally violate security policy, but
security violations are assumed to be accidental and not likely
to affect overall system security.
- "Untrusted": The component is of unknown or suspicious
provenance and must be treated as deliberately malicious. (See:
malicious logic.)
2. (I) /PKI/ A relationship between a certificate user and a CA in
which the user acts according to the assumption that the CA
creates only valid digital certificates.
Tutorial: "Generally, an entity is said to 'trust' a second entity
when the first entity makes the assumption that the second entity
will behave exactly as the first entity expects. This trust may
apply only for some specific function. The key role of trust in
[X.509] is to describe the relationship between an entity [i.e., a
certificate user] and a [CA]; an entity shall be certain that it
can trust the CA to create only valid and reliable certificates."
[X509]
$ trust anchor
(I) /PKI/ An established point of trust (usually based on the
authority of some person, office, or organization) from which a
certificate user begins the validation of a certification path.
(See: apex trust anchor, path validation, trust anchor CA, trust
anchor certificate, trust anchor key.)
Shirey Informational [Page 315]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it
because it is used in various ways in existing IDOCs and other PKI
literature. The literature almost always uses this term in a sense
that is equivalent to this definition, but usage often differs
with regard to what constitutes the point of trust.
Tutorial: A trust anchor may be defined as being based on a public
key, a CA, a public-key certificate, or some combination or
variation of those:
- 1. A public key as a point of trust: Although a certification
path is defined as beginning with a "sequence of public-key
certificates", an implementation of a path validation process
might not explicitly handle a root certificate as part of the
path, but instead begin the process by using a trusted root key
to verify the signature on a certificate that was issued by the
root.
Therefore, "trust anchor" is sometimes defined as just a public
key. (See: root key, trust anchor key, trusted key.)
- 2. A CA as a point of trust: A trusted public key is just one
of the data elements needed for path validation; the IPS path
validation algorithm [R3280] also needs the name of the CA to
which that key belongs, i.e., the DN of the issuer of the first
X.509 certificate to be validated on the path. (See: issue.)
Therefore, "trust anchor" is sometimes defined as either just a
CA (where some public key is implied) or as a CA together with
a specified public key belonging to that CA. (See: root, trust
anchor CA, trusted CA.)
Example: "A public key and the name of a [CA] that is used to
validate the first certificate in a sequence of certificates.
The trust anchor public key is used to verify the signature on
a certificate issued by a trust anchor [CA]." [SP57]
- 3. A public-key certificate as a point of trust: Besides the
trusted CA's public key and name, the path validation algorithm
needs to know the digital signature algorithm and any
associated parameters with which the public key is used, and
also any constraints that have been placed on the set of paths
that may be validated using the key. All of this information is
available from a CA's public-key certificate.
Therefore, "trust anchor" is sometimes defined as a public-key
certificate of a CA. (See: root certificate, trust anchor
certificate, trusted certificate.)
Shirey Informational [Page 316]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- 4. Combinations: Combinations and variations of the first three
definitions are also used in the PKI literature.
Example: "trust anchor information". The IPS standard for path
validation [R3280] specifies the information that describes "a
CA that serves as a trust anchor for the certification path.
The trust anchor information includes: (a) the trusted issuer
name, (b) the trusted public key algorithm, (c) the trusted
public key, and (d) optionally, the trusted public key
parameters associated with the public key. The trust anchor
information may be provided to the path processing procedure in
the form of a self-signed certificate. The trusted anchor
information is trusted because it was delivered to the path
processing procedure by some trustworthy out-of-band procedure.
If the trusted public key algorithm requires parameters, then
the parameters are provided along with the trusted public key."
$ trust anchor CA
(I) A CA that is the subject of a trust anchor certificate or
otherwise establishes a trust anchor key. (See: root, trusted CA.)
Tutorial: The selection of a CA to be a trust anchor is a matter
of policy. Some of the possible choices include (a) the top CA in
a hierarchical PKI, (b) the CA that issued the verifier's own
certificate, or (c) any other CA in a network PKI. Different
applications may rely on different trust anchors, or may accept
paths that begin with any of a set of trust anchors. The IPS path
validation algorithm is the same, regardless of the choice.
$ trust anchor certificate
(I) A public-key certificate that is used to provide the first
public key in a certification path. (See: root certificate, trust
anchor, trusted certificate.)
$ trust anchor key
(I) A public key that is used as the first public key in a
certification path. (See: root key, trust anchor, trusted public
key.)
$ trust anchor information
(I) See: secondary definition under "trust anchor".
$ trust chain
(D) Synonym for "certification path". (See: trust anchor, trusted
certificate.)
Shirey Informational [Page 317]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term, because it
unnecessarily duplicates the meaning of the internationally
standardized term.
Also, the term mixes concepts in a potentially misleading way.
Having "trust" involves factors unrelated to simply verifying
signatures and performing other tests as specified by a standard
algorithm for path validation (e.g., RFC 3280). Thus, even if a
user is able to validate a certification path algorithmically, the
user still might distrust one of the CAs that issued certificates
in that path or distrust some other aspects of the PKI.
$ trust-file PKI
(I) A non-hierarchical PKI in which each certificate user has its
own local file (which is used by application software) of trust
anchors, i.e., either public keys or public-key certificates that
the user trusts as starting points for certification paths. (See:
trust anchor, web of trust. Compare: hierarchical PKI, mesh PKI.)
Example: Popular browsers are distributed with an initial file of
trust anchor certificates, which often are self-signed
certificates. Users can add certificates to the file or delete
from it. The file may be directly managed by the user, or the
user's organization may manage it from a centralized server.
$ trust hierarchy
(D) Synonym for "certification hierarchy".
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term because it mixes
concepts in a potentially misleading way, and because a trust
hierarchy could be implemented in other ways. (See: trust, trust
chain, web of trust.)
$ trust level
(N) A characterization of a standard of security protection to be
met by an information system. (See: Common Criteria, TCSEC.)
Tutorial: A trust level is based not only on (a) the presence of
security mechanisms, but also on the use of (b) systems
engineering discipline to properly structure the system and (c)
implementation analysis to ensure that the system provides an
appropriate degree of trust.
$ trusted
(I) See: secondary definition under "trust".
Shirey Informational [Page 318]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ trusted CA
(I) A CA upon which a certificate user relies as issuing valid
certificates; especially a CA that is used as a trust anchor CA.
(See: certification path, root, trust anchor CA, validation.)
Tutorial. This trust is transitive to the extent that the X.509
certificate extensions permit; that is, if a trusted CA issues a
certificate to another CA, a user that trusts the first CA also
trusts the second CA if the user succeeds in validating the
certificate path (see: path validation).
$ trusted certificate
(I) A digital certificate that a certificate user accepts as being
valid "a priori", i.e., without testing the certificate to
validate it as the final certificate on a certification path;
especially a certificate that is used as a trust anchor
certificate. (See: certification path, root certificate, trust
anchor certificate, trust-file PKI, validation.)
Tutorial: The acceptance of a certificate as trusted is a matter
of policy and choice. Usually, a certificate is accepted as
trusted because the user obtained it by reliable, out-of-band
means that cause the user to believe the certificate accurately
binds its subject's name to the subject's public key or other
attribute values. Many choices are possible; e.g., a trusted
public-key certificate might be (a) the root certificate in a
hierarchical PKI, (b) the certificate of the CA that issued the
user's own certificate in a mesh PKI, or (c) a certificate
provided with an application that uses a trust-file PKI.
$ Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC)
(N) A standard for evaluating the security provided by operating
systems [CSC1, DoD1]. Known as the "Orange Book" because of the
color of its cover; first document in the Rainbow Series. (See:
Common Criteria, Deprecated Usage under "Green Book", Orange Book,
trust level, trusted system. Compare: TSEC.)
Tutorial: The TCSEC defines classes of hierarchically ordered
assurance levels for rating computer systems. From highest to
lowest, the classes are as follows:
- Division A: Verified protection.
Beyond A1 Beyond current technology. (See: beyond A1.)
Class A1 Verified design. (See: SCOMP.)
- Division B: Mandatory protection.
Class B3 Security domains.
Class B2 Structured protection. (See: Multics.)
Class B1 Labeled security protection.
Shirey Informational [Page 319]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
- Division C: Discretionary protection.
Class C2 Controlled access protection.
Class C1 Discretionary security protection.
- Division D: Minimal protection, i.e., has been evaluated but
does not meet the requirements for a higher evaluation class.
$ trusted computing base (TCB)
(N) "The totality of protection mechanisms within a computer
system, including hardware, firmware, and software, the
combination of which is responsible for enforcing a security
policy." [NCS04] (See: "trusted" under "trust". Compare: TPM.)
$ Trusted Computing Group (TCG)
(N) A not-for-profit, industry standards organization formed to
develop, define, and promote open standards for hardware-enabled
trusted computing and security technologies, including hardware
building blocks and software interfaces, across multiple
platforms, peripherals, and devices. (See: TPM, trusted system.
Compare: TSIG.)
$ trusted distribution
(I) /COMPUSEC/ "A trusted method for distributing the TCB
hardware, software, and firmware components, both originals and
updates, that provides methods for protecting the TCB from
modification during distribution and for detection of any changes
to the TCB that may occur." [NCS04] (See: code signing,
configuration control.)
$ trusted key
(D) Abbreviation for "trusted public key" and also for other types
of keys. (See: root key, trust anchor key.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD either (a) state a definition for
this term or (b) use a different, less ambiguous term. This term
is ambiguous when it stands alone; e.g., it could refer to a
trusted public key or to a private key or symmetric key that is
believed to be secure (i.e., not compromised).
$ trusted path
1a. (I) /COMPUSEC/ A mechanism by which a computer system user can
communicate directly and reliably with the TCB and that can only
be activated by the user or the TCB and cannot be imitated by
untrusted software within the computer. [NCS04]
1b. (I) /COMSEC/ A mechanism by which a person or process can
communicate directly with a cryptographic module and that can only
be activated by the person, process, or module, and cannot be
imitated by untrusted software within the module. [FP140]
Shirey Informational [Page 320]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Trusted Platform Module (TPM)
(N) The name of a specification, published by the TCG, for a
microcontroller that can store secured information; and also the
general name of implementations of that specification. (Compare:
TCB.)
$ trusted process
(I) A system component that has privileges that enable it to
affect the state of system security and that can, therefore,
through incorrect or malicious execution, violate the system's
security policy. (See: privileged process, trusted system.)
$ trusted public key
(I) A public key upon which a user relies; especially a public key
that is used as a trust anchor key. (See: certification path, root
key, trust anchor key, validation.)
Tutorial: A trusted public key could be (a) the root key in a
hierarchical PKI, (b) the key of the CA that issued the user's own
certificate in a mesh PKI, or (c) any key accepted by the user in
a trust-file PKI.
$ trusted recovery
(I) A process that, after a system has experienced a failure or an
attack, restores the system to normal operation (or to a secure
state) without causing a security compromise. (See: recovery.)
$ trusted subnetwork
(I) A subnetwork containing hosts and routers that trust each
other not to engage in active or passive attacks. (There also is
an assumption that the underlying communication channels, such as
telephone lines or a LAN, are protected from attack.)
$ trusted system
1. (I) /information system/ A system that operates as expected,
according to design and policy, doing what is required -- despite
environmental disruption, human user and operator errors, and
attacks by hostile parties -- and not doing other things [NRC98].
(See: trust level, trusted process. Compare: trustworthy.)
2. (N) /multilevel secure/ "A [trusted system is a] system that
employs sufficient hardware and software assurance measures to
allow its use for simultaneous processing of a range of sensitive
or classified information." [NCS04] (See: multilevel security
mode.)
Shirey Informational [Page 321]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ Trusted Systems Interoperability Group (TSIG)
(N) A forum of computer vendors, system integrators, and users
devoted to promoting interoperability of trusted computer systems.
(See: trusted system. Compare: TCG.)
$ trustworthy system
1. (I) A system that not only is trusted, but also warrants that
trust because the system's behavior can be validated in some
convincing way, such as through formal analysis or code review.
(See: trust. Compare: trusted.)
2. (O) /Digital Signature Guidelines/ "Computer hardware,
software, and procedures that: (a) are reasonably secure from
intrusion and misuse; (b) provide a reasonably reliable level of
availability, reliability, and correct operation; (c) are
reasonably suited to performing their intended functions; and (d)
adhere to generally accepted security principles." [DSG]
$ TSEC
(O) See: Telecommunications Security Nomenclature System.
(Compare: TCSEC.)
$ TSIG
1. (N) See: Trusted System Interoperability Group.
2. (I) A mnemonic (presumed to be derived from "Transaction
SIGnature") referring to an Internet protocol (RFC 2845) for data
origin authentication and data integrity for certain DNS
operations. (See: TKEY.)
$ tunnel
1. (I) A communication channel created in a computer network by
encapsulating (i.e., layering) a communication protocol's data
packets in (i.e., above) a second protocol that normally would be
carried above, or at the same layer as, the first one. (See: L2TP,
tunnel mode, VPN. Compare: covert channel.)
Tutorial: Tunneling can involve almost any two IPS protocol
layers. For example, a TCP connection between two hosts could
conceivably be carried above SMTP (i.e., in SMTP messages) as a
covert channel to evade access controls that a security gateway
applies to the normal TCP layer that is below SMTP.
Usually, however, a tunnel is a logical point-to-point link --
i.e., an OSIRM Layer 2 connection -- created by encapsulating the
Layer 2 protocol in one of the following three types of IPS
protocols: (a) an IPS Transport-Layer protocol (such as TCP), (b)
an IPS Network-Layer or Internet-Layer protocol (such as IP), or
Shirey Informational [Page 322]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
(c) another Layer 2 protocol. In many cases, the encapsulation is
accomplished with an extra, intermediate protocol (i.e., a
"tunneling protocol"; e.g., L2TP) that is layered below the
tunneled Layer 2 protocol and above the encapsulating protocol.
Tunneling can be used to move data between computers that use a
protocol not supported by the network connecting them. Tunneling
also can enable a computer network to use the services of a second
network as though the second network were a set of point-to-point
links between the first network's nodes. (See: VPN.)
2. (O) /SET/ The name of a SET private extension that indicates
whether the CA or the payment gateway supports passing encrypted
messages to the cardholder through the merchant. If so, the
extension lists OIDs of symmetric encryption algorithms that are
supported.
$ tunnel mode
(I) One of two ways to apply the IPsec protocols (AH and ESP) to
protect data packets; in this mode, the IPsec protocol
encapsulates (i.e., the protection applies to) IP packets, rather
than the packets of higher-layer protocols. (See: tunnel. Compare:
transport mode.)
Tutorial: Each end of a tunnel-mode security association may be
either a host or a security gateway. Whenever either end of an
IPsec security association is a security gateway, the association
is required to be in tunnel mode.
$ two-person control
(I) The close surveillance and control of a system, a process, or
materials (especially with regard to cryptography) at all times by
a minimum of two appropriately authorized persons, each capable of
detecting incorrect and unauthorized procedures with respect to
the tasks to be performed and each familiar with established
security requirements. (See: dual control, no-lone zone.)
$ Twofish
(O) A symmetric, 128-bit block cipher with variable key length
(128, 192, or 256 bits), developed by Counterpane Labs as a
candidate for the AES. (See: Blowfish.)
$ type 0 product
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ Classified cryptographic
equipment endorsed by NSA for use (when appropriately keyed) in
electronically distributing bulk keying material.
Shirey Informational [Page 323]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ type 1 key
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Generated and distributed
under the auspices of NSA for use in a cryptographic device for
the protection of classified and sensitive national security
information." [C4009]
$ type 1 product
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Cryptographic equipment,
assembly or component classified or certified by NSA for
encrypting and decrypting classified and sensitive national
security information when appropriately keyed. Developed using
established NSA business processes and containing NSA approved
algorithms. Used to protect systems requiring the most stringent
protection mechanisms." [C4009]
Tutorial: The current definition of this term is less specific
than an earlier version: "Classified or controlled cryptographic
item endorsed by the NSA for securing classified and sensitive
U.S. Government information, when appropriately keyed. The term
refers only to products, and not to information, key, services, or
controls. Type 1 products contain classified NSA algorithms. They
are available to U.S. Government users, their contractors, and
federally sponsored non-U.S. Government activities subject to
export restrictions in accordance with International Traffic in
Arms Regulation." [from an earlier version of C4009] (See: ITAR.)
$ type 2 key
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Generated and distributed
under the auspices of NSA for use in a cryptographic device for
the protection of unclassified national security information."
[C4009]
$ type 2 product
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Cryptographic equipment,
assembly, or component certified by NSA for encrypting or
decrypting sensitive national security information when
appropriately keyed. Developed using established NSA business
processes and containing NSA approved algorithms. Used to protect
systems requiring protection mechanisms exceeding best commercial
practices including systems used for the protection of
unclassified national security information." [C4009]
Tutorial: The current definition of this term is less specific
than an earlier version: "Unclassified cryptographic equipment,
assembly, or component, endorsed by the NSA, for use in national
security systems as defined in Title 40 U.S.C. Section 1452."
[from an earlier version of C4009] (See: national security system.
Compare: EUCI.)
Shirey Informational [Page 324]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ type 3 key
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Used in a cryptographic
device for the protection of unclassified sensitive information,
even if used in a Type 1 or Type 2 product." [C4009]
$ type 3 product
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Unclassified cryptographic
equipment, assembly, or component used, when appropriately keyed,
for encrypting or decrypting unclassified sensitive U.S.
Government or commercial information, and to protect systems
requiring protection mechanisms consistent with standard
commercial practices. Developed using established commercial
standards and containing NIST approved cryptographic
algorithms/modules or successfully evaluated by the National
Information Assurance Partnership (NIAP)." [C4009]
$ type 4 key
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Used by a cryptographic
device in support of its Type 4 functionality; i.e., any provision
of key that lacks U.S. Government endorsement or oversight."
[C4009]
$ type 4 product
(O) /cryptography, U.S. Government/ "Unevaluated commercial
cryptographic equipment, assemblies, or components that neither
NSA nor NIST certify for any Government usage. These products are
typically delivered as part of commercial offerings and are
commensurate with the vendor's commercial practices. These
products may contain either vendor proprietary algorithms,
algorithms registered by NIST, or algorithms registered by NIST
and published in a FIPS." [C4009]
$ UDP
(I) See: User Datagram Protocol.
$ UDP flood
(I) A denial-of-service attack that takes advantage of (a) one
system's UDP test function that generates a series of characters
for each packet it receives and (b) another system's UPD test
function that echoes any character it receives; the attack
connects (a) to (b) to cause a nonstop flow of data between the
two systems. (See: flooding.)
$ unauthorized disclosure
(I) A circumstance or event whereby an entity gains access to
information for which the entity is not authorized.
Shirey Informational [Page 325]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Tutorial: This type of threat consequence can be caused by the
following types of threat actions: exposure, interception,
inference, and intrusion. Some methods of protecting against this
consequence include access control, flow control, and inference
control. (See: data confidentiality.)
$ unauthorized user
(I) /access control/ A system entity that accesses a system
resource for which the entity has not received an authorization.
(See: user. Compare: authorized user, insider, outsider.)
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it
because the term is used in many ways and could easily be
misunderstood.
$ uncertainty
(N) An information-theoretic measure (usually stated as a number
of bits) of the minimum amount of plaintext information that needs
to be recovered from cipher text to learn the entire plain text
that was encrypted. [SP63] (See: entropy.)
$ unclassified
(I) Not classified. (Compare: FOUO.)
$ unencrypted
(I) Not encrypted.
$ unforgeable
(I) /cryptography/ The property of a cryptographic data structure
(i.e., a data structure that is defined using one or more
cryptographic functions, e.g., "digital certificate") that makes
it computationally infeasible to construct (i.e., compute) an
unauthorized but correct value of the structure without having
knowledge of one of more keys.
Tutorial: This definition is narrower than general English usage,
where "unforgeable" means unable to be fraudulently created or
duplicated. In that broader sense, anyone can forge a digital
certificate containing any set of data items whatsoever by
generating the to-be-signed certificate and signing it with any
private key whatsoever. But for PKI purposes, the forged data
structure is invalid if it is not signed with the true private key
of the claimed issuer; thus, the forgery will be detected when a
certificate user uses the true public key of the claimed issuer to
verify the signature.
Shirey Informational [Page 326]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ uniform resource identifier (URI)
(I) A type of formatted identifier (RFC 3986) that encapsulates
the name of an Internet object, and labels it with an
identification of the name space, thus producing a member of the
universal set of names in registered name spaces and of addresses
referring to registered protocols or name spaces.
Example: HTML uses URIs to identify the target of hyperlinks.
Usage: "A URI can be classified as a locator (see: URL), a name
(see: URN), or both. ... Instances of URIs from any given scheme
may have the characteristics of names or locators or both, often
depending on the persistence and care in the assignment of
identifiers by the naming authority, rather than on any quality of
the scheme." IDOCs SHOULD "use the general term 'URI' rather than
the more restrictive terms 'URL' and 'URN'." (RFC 3986)
$ uniform resource locator (URL)
(I) A URI that describes the access method and location of an
information resource object on the Internet. (See: Usage under
"URI". Compare: URN.)
Tutorial: The term URL "refers to the subset of URIs that, besides
identifying a resource, provide a means of locating the resource
by describing its primary access mechanism (e.g., its network
'location')." (RFC 3986)
A URL provides explicit instructions on how to access the named
object. For example,
"ftp://bbnarchive.bbn.com/foo/bar/picture/cambridge.zip" is a URL.
The part before the colon specifies the access scheme or protocol,
and the part after the colon is interpreted according to that
access method. Usually, two slashes after the colon indicate the
host name of a server (written as a domain name). In an FTP or
HTTP URL, the host name is followed by the path name of a file on
the server. The last (optional) part of a URL may be either a
fragment identifier that indicates a position in the file, or a
query string.
$ uniform resource name (URN)
(I) A URI with the properties of a name. (See: Usage under "URI".
Compare: URL.)
Tutorial: The term URN "has been used historically to refer to
both URIs under the "urn" scheme (RFC 2141), which are required to
remain globally unique and persistent even when the resource
ceases to exist or becomes unavailable, and to any other URI with
the properties of a name." (RFC 3986)
Shirey Informational [Page 327]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ untrusted
(I) See: secondary definition under "trust".
$ untrusted process
1. (I) A system component that is not able to affect the state of
system security through incorrect or malicious operation. Example:
A component that has its operations confined by a security kernel.
(See: trusted process.)
2. (I) A system component that (a) has not been evaluated or
examined for adherence to a specified security policy and,
therefore, (b) must be assumed to contain logic that might attempt
to circumvent system security.
$ UORA
(O) See: user-PIN ORA.
$ update
See: "certificate update" and "key update".
$ upgrade
(I) /data security/ Increase the classification level of data
without changing the information content of the data. (See:
classify, downgrade, regrade.)
$ URI
(I) See: uniform resource identifier.
$ URL
(I) See: uniform resource locator.
$ URN
(I) See: uniform resource name.
$ user
See: system user.
Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a definition for it
because the term is used in many ways and could easily be
misunderstood.
$ user authentication service
(I) A security service that verifies the identity claimed by an
entity that attempts to access the system. (See: authentication,
user.)
Shirey Informational [Page 328]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ User Datagram Protocol (UDP)
(I) An Internet Standard, Transport-Layer protocol (RFC 768) that
delivers a sequence of datagrams from one computer to another in a
computer network. (See: UPD flood.)
Tutorial: UDP assumes that IP is the underlying protocol. UDP
enables application programs to send transaction-oriented data to
other programs with minimal protocol mechanism. UDP does not
provide reliable delivery, flow control, sequencing, or other end-
to-end service guarantees that TCP does.
$ user identifier
(I) See: identifier.
$ user identity
(I) See: identity.
$ user PIN
(O) /MISSI/ One of two PINs that control access to the functions
and stored data of a FORTEZZA PC card. Knowledge of the user PIN
enables a card user to perform the FORTEZZA functions that are
intended for use by an end user. (See: PIN. Compare: SSO PIN.)
$ user-PIN ORA (UORA)
(O) /MISSI/ A MISSI organizational RA that operates in a mode in
which the ORA performs only the subset of card management
functions that are possible with knowledge of the user PIN for a
FORTEZZA PC card. (See: no-PIN ORA, SSO-PIN ORA.)
$ usurpation
(I) A circumstance or event that results in control of system
services or functions by an unauthorized entity. This type of
threat consequence can be caused by the following types of threat
actions: misappropriation, misuse. (See: access control.)
$ UTCTime
(N) The ASN.1 data type "UTCTime" contains a calendar date
(YYMMDD) and a time to a precision of either one minute (HHMM) or
one second (HHMMSS), where the time is either (a) Coordinated
Universal Time or (b) the local time followed by an offset that
enables Coordinated Universal Time to be calculated. (See:
Coordinated Universal Time. Compare: GeneralizedTime.)
Usage: If you care about centuries or millennia, you probably need
to use the GeneralizedTime data type instead of UTCTime.
Shirey Informational [Page 329]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ v1 certificate
(N) An abbreviation that ambiguously refers to either an "X.509
public-key certificate in version 1 format" or an "X.509 attribute
certificate in version 1 format".
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs MAY use this term as an abbreviation of
"version 1 X.509 public-key certificate", but only after using the
full term at the first instance. Otherwise, the term is ambiguous,
because X.509 specifies both v1 public-key certificates and v1
attribute certificates. (See: X.509 attribute certificate, X.509
public-key certificate.)
$ v1 CRL
(N) Abbreviation of "X.509 CRL in version 1 format".
Usage: IDOCs MAY use this abbreviation, but SHOULD use the full
term at its first occurrence and define the abbreviation there.
$ v2 certificate
(N) Abbreviation of "X.509 public-key certificate in version 2
format".
Usage: IDOCs MAY use this abbreviation, but SHOULD use the full
term at its first occurrence and define the abbreviation there.
$ v2 CRL
(N) Abbreviation of "X.509 CRL in version 2 format".
Usage: IDOCs MAY use this abbreviation, but SHOULD use the full
term at its first occurrence and define the abbreviation there.
$ v3 certificate
(N) Abbreviation of "X.509 public-key certificate in version 3
format".
Usage: IDOCs MAY use this abbreviation, but SHOULD use the full
term at its first occurrence and define the abbreviation there.
$ valid certificate
1. (I) A digital certificate that can be validated successfully.
(See: validate, verify.)
2. (I) A digital certificate for which the binding of the data
items can be trusted.
$ valid signature
(D) Synonym for "verified signature".
Shirey Informational [Page 330]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this synonym. This Glossary
recommends saying "validate the certificate" and "verify the
signature"; therefore, it would be inconsistent to say that a
signature is "valid". (See: validate, verify.)
$ validate
1. (I) Establish the soundness or correctness of a construct.
Example: certificate validation. (See: validate vs. verify.)
2. (I) To officially approve something, sometimes in relation to a
standard. Example: NIST validates cryptographic modules for
conformance with [FP140].
$ validate vs. verify
Usage: To ensure consistency and align with ordinary English
usage, IDOCs SHOULD comply with the following two rules:
- Rule 1: Use "validate" when referring to a process intended to
establish the soundness or correctness of a construct (e.g.,
"certificate validation"). (See: validate.)
- Rule 2: Use "verify" when referring to a process intended to
test or prove the truth or accuracy of a fact or value (e.g.,
"authenticate"). (See: verify.)
Tutorial: The Internet security community sometimes uses these two
terms inconsistently, especially in a PKI context. Most often,
however, we say "verify the signature" but say "validate the
certificate". That is, we "verify" atomic truths but "validate"
data structures, relationships, and systems that are composed of
or depend on verified items. This usage has a basis in Latin:
The word "valid" derives from a Latin word that means "strong".
Thus, to validate means to check that a construct is sound. For
example, a certificate user validates a public-key certificate to
establish trust in the binding that the certificate asserts
between an identity and a key. This can include checking various
aspects of the certificate's construction, such as verifying the
digital signature on the certificate by performing calculations,
verifying that the current time is within the certificate's
validity period, and validating a certification path involving
additional certificates.
The word "verify" derives from a Latin word that means "true".
Thus, to verify means to check the truth of an assertion by
examining evidence or performing tests. For example, to verify an
identity, an authentication process examines identification
information that is presented or generated. To validate a
certificate, a certificate user verifies the digital signature on
the certificate by performing calculations, verifies that the
Shirey Informational [Page 331]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
current time is within the certificate's validity period, and may
need to validate a certification path involving additional
certificates.
$ validation
(I) See: validate vs. verify.
$ validity period
(I) /PKI/ A data item in a digital certificate that specifies the
time period for which the binding between data items (especially
between the subject name and the public key value in a public-key
certificate) is valid, except if the certificate appears on a CRL
or the key appears on a CKL. (See: cryptoperiod, key lifetime.)
$ value-added network (VAN)
(I) A computer network or subnetwork (usually a commercial
enterprise) that transmits, receives, and stores EDI transactions
on behalf of its users.
Tutorial: A VAN may also provide additional services, ranging from
EDI format translation, to EDI-to-FAX conversion, to integrated
business systems.
$ VAN
(I) See: value-added network.
$ verification
1. (I) /authentication/ The process of examining information to
establish the truth of a claimed fact or value. (See: validate vs.
verify, verify. Compare: authentication.)
2. (N) /COMPUSEC/ The process of comparing two levels of system
specification for proper correspondence, such as comparing a
security model with a top-level specification, a top-level
specification with source code, or source code with object code.
[NCS04]
$ verified design
(O) See: TCSEC Class A1.
$ verify
(I) To test or prove the truth or accuracy of a fact or value.
(See: validate vs. verify, verification. Compare: authenticate.)
$ vet
(I) /verb/ To examine or evaluate thoroughly. (Compare:
authenticate, identity proofing, validate, verify.)
Shirey Informational [Page 332]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ violation
See: security violation.
$ virtual private network (VPN)
(I) A restricted-use, logical (i.e., artificial or simulated)
computer network that is constructed from the system resources of
a relatively public, physical (i.e., real) network (e.g., the
Internet), often by using encryption (located at hosts or
gateways), and often by tunneling links of the virtual network
across the real network. (See: tunnel.)
Tutorial: A VPN is generally less expensive to build and operate
than a dedicated real network, because the virtual network shares
the cost of system resources with other users of the underlying
real network. For example, if a corporation has LANs at several
different sites, each connected to the Internet by a firewall, the
corporation could create a VPN by using encrypted tunnels to
connect from firewall to firewall across the Internet.
$ virus
(I) A self-replicating (and usually hidden) section of computer
software (usually malicious logic) that propagates by infecting --
i.e., inserting a copy of itself into and becoming part of --
another program. A virus cannot run by itself; it requires that
its host program be run to make the virus active.
$ Visa Cash
(O) A smartcard-based electronic money system that incorporates
cryptography and can be used to make payments via the Internet.
(See: IOTP.)
$ volatile media
(I) Storage media that require an external power supply to
maintain stored information. (Compare: non-volatile media,
permanent storage.)
$ VPN
(I) See: virtual private network.
$ vulnerability
(I) A flaw or weakness in a system's design, implementation, or
operation and management that could be exploited to violate the
system's security policy. (See: harden.)
Tutorial: A system can have three types of vulnerabilities: (a)
vulnerabilities in design or specification; (b) vulnerabilities in
implementation; and (c) vulnerabilities in operation and
management. Most systems have one or more vulnerabilities, but
Shirey Informational [Page 333]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
this does not mean that the systems are too flawed to use. Not
every threat results in an attack, and not every attack succeeds.
Success depends on the degree of vulnerability, the strength of
attacks, and the effectiveness of any countermeasures in use. If
the attacks needed to exploit a vulnerability are very difficult
to carry out, then the vulnerability may be tolerable. If the
perceived benefit to an attacker is small, then even an easily
exploited vulnerability may be tolerable. However, if the attacks
are well understood and easily made, and if the vulnerable system
is employed by a wide range of users, then it is likely that there
will be enough motivation for someone to launch an attack.
$ W3
(D) Synonym for WWW.
Deprecated Abbreviation: This abbreviation could be confused with
W3C; use "WWW" instead.
$ W3C
(N) See: World Wide Web Consortium.
$ war dialer
(I) /slang/ A computer program that automatically dials a series
of telephone numbers to find lines connected to computer systems,
and catalogs those numbers so that a cracker can try to break the
systems.
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs that use this term SHOULD state a
definition for it because the term could confuse international
readers.
$ Wassenaar Arrangement
(N) The Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional
Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies is a global, multilateral
agreement approved by 33 countries in July 1996 to contribute to
regional and international security and stability, by promoting
information exchange concerning, and greater responsibility in,
transfers of arms and dual-use items, thus preventing
destabilizing accumulations. (See: International Traffic in Arms
Regulations.)
Tutorial: The Arrangement began operations in September 1996 with
headquarters in Vienna. The participating countries were
Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech
Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian
Shirey Informational [Page 334]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Federation, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey,
Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States.
Participating countries seek through their national policies to
ensure that transfers do not contribute to the development or
enhancement of military capabilities that undermine the goals of
the arrangement, and are not diverted to support such
capabilities. The countries maintain effective export controls for
items on the agreed lists, which are reviewed periodically to
account for technological developments and experience gained.
Through transparency and exchange of views and information,
suppliers of arms and dual-use items can develop common
understandings of the risks associated with their transfer and
assess the scope for coordinating national control policies to
combat these risks. Members provide semi-annual notification of
arms transfers, covering seven categories derived from the UN
Register of Conventional Arms. Members also report transfers or
denials of transfers of certain controlled dual-use items.
However, the decision to transfer or deny transfer of any item is
the sole responsibility of each participating country. All
measures undertaken with respect to the arrangement are in
accordance with national legislation and policies and are
implemented on the basis of national discretion.
$ watermarking
See: digital watermarking.
$ weak key
(I) In the context of a particular cryptographic algorithm, a key
value that provides poor security. (See: strong.)
Example: The DEA has four "weak keys" [Schn] for which encryption
produces the same result as decryption. It also has ten pairs of
"semi-weak keys" [Schn] (a.k.a. "dual keys" [FP074]) for which
encryption with one key in the pair produces the same result as
decryption with the other key.
$ web, Web
1. (I) /not capitalized/ IDOCs SHOULD NOT capitalize "web" when
using the term (usually as an adjective) to refer generically to
technology -- such as web browsers, web servers, HTTP, and HTML --
that is used in the Web or similar networks.
2. (I) /capitalized/ IDOCs SHOULD capitalize "Web" when using the
term (as either a noun or an adjective) to refer specifically to
the World Wide Web. (Similarly, see: internet.)
Shirey Informational [Page 335]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use "web" or "Web" in a way that might
confuse these definitions with the PGP "web of trust". When using
Web as an abbreviation for "World Wide Web", IDOCs SHOULD fully
spell out the term at the first instance of usage.
$ web of trust
(D) /PGP/ A PKI architecture in which each certificate user
defines their own trust anchor(s) by depending on personal
relationships. (See: trust anchor. Compare: hierarchical PKI, mesh
PKI.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term except with
reference to PGP. This term mixes concepts in potentially
misleading ways; e.g., this architecture does not depend on World
Wide Web technology. Instead of this term, IDOCs MAY use "trust-
file PKI". (See: web, Web).
Tutorial: This type of architecture does not usually include
public repositories of certificates. Instead, each certificate
user builds their own, private repository of trusted public keys
by making personal judgments about being able to trust certain
people to be holding properly certified keys of other people. It
is this set of person-to-person relationships from which the
architecture gets its name.
$ web server
(I) A software process that runs on a host computer connected to a
network and responds to HTTP requests made by client web browsers.
$ WEP
(N) See: Wired Equivalency Protocol.
$ Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP)
(N) A cryptographic protocol that is defined in the IEEE 802.11
standard and encapsulates the packets on wireless LANs. Usage:
a.k.a. "Wired Equivalency Protocol".
Tutorial: The WEP design, which uses RC4 to encrypt both the plain
text and a CRC, has been shown to be flawed in multiple ways; and
it also has often suffered from flawed implementation and
management.
$ wiretapping
(I) An attack that intercepts and accesses information contained
in a data flow in a communication system. (See: active
wiretapping, end-to-end encryption, passive wiretapping, secondary
definition under "interception".)
Shirey Informational [Page 336]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Usage: Although the term originally referred to making a
mechanical connection to an electrical conductor that links two
nodes, it is now used to refer to accessing information from any
sort of medium used for a link or even from a node, such as a
gateway or subnetwork switch.
Tutorial: Wiretapping can be characterized according to intent:
- "Active wiretapping" attempts to alter the data or otherwise
affect the flow.
- "Passive wiretapping" only attempts to observe the data flow
and gain knowledge of information contained in it.
$ work factor
1a. (I) /COMPUSEC/ The estimated amount of effort or time that can
be expected to be expended by a potential intruder to penetrate a
system, or defeat a particular countermeasure, when using
specified amounts of expertise and resources. (See: brute force,
impossible, strength.)
1b. (I) /cryptography/ The estimated amount of computing power and
time needed to break a cryptographic system. (See: brute force,
impossible, strength.)
$ World Wide Web ("the Web", WWW)
(N) The global, hypermedia-based collection of information and
services that is available on Internet servers and is accessed by
browsers using Hypertext Transfer Protocol and other information
retrieval mechanisms. (See: web vs. Web, [R2084].)
$ World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
(N) Created in October 1994 to develop and standardize protocols
to promote the evolution and interoperability of the Web, and now
consisting of hundreds of member organizations (commercial firms,
governmental agencies, schools, and others).
Tutorial: W3C Recommendations are developed through a process
similar to that of the standards published by other organizations,
such as the IETF. The W3 Recommendation Track (i.e., standards
track) has four levels of increasing maturity: Working, Candidate
Recommendation, Proposed Recommendation, and W3C Recommendation.
W3C Recommendations are similar to the standards published by
other organizations. (Compare: Internet Standard, ISO.)
$ worm
(I) A computer program that can run independently, can propagate a
complete working version of itself onto other hosts on a network,
and may consume system resources destructively. (See: mobile code,
Morris Worm, virus.)
Shirey Informational [Page 337]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
$ wrap
1. (N) To use cryptography to provide data confidentiality service
for keying material. (See: encrypt, wrapping algorithm, wrapping
key. Compare: seal, shroud.)
2. (D) To use cryptography to provide data confidentiality service
for data in general.
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term with definition 2
because that duplicates the meaning of the more widely understood
"encrypt".
$ wrapping algorithm
(N) An encryption algorithm that is specifically intended for use
in encrypting keys. (See: KEK, wrap.)
$ wrapping key
(N) Synonym for "KEK". (See: encrypt. Compare: seal, shroud.)
$ write
(I) /security model/ A system operation that causes a flow of
information from a subject to an object. (See: access mode.
Compare: read.)
$ WWW
(I) See: World Wide Web.
$ X.400
(N) An ITU-T Recommendation [X400] that is one part of a joint
ITU-T/ISO multi-part standard (X.400-X.421) that defines the
Message Handling Systems. (The ISO equivalent is IS 10021, parts
1-7.) (See: Message Handling Systems.)
$ X.500
(N) An ITU-T Recommendation [X500] that is one part of a joint
ITU-T/ISO multi-part standard (X.500-X.525) that defines the X.500
Directory, a conceptual collection of systems that provide
distributed directory capabilities for OSI entities, processes,
applications, and services. (The ISO equivalent is IS 9594-1 and
related standards, IS 9594-x.) (See: directory vs. Directory,
X.509.)
Tutorial: The X.500 Directory is structured as a tree (the
Directory Information Tree), and information is stored in
directory entries. Each entry is a collection of information about
one object, and each object has a DN. A directory entry is
composed of attributes, each with a type and one or more values.
For example, if a PKI uses the Directory to distribute
Shirey Informational [Page 338]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
certificates, then the X.509 public-key certificate of an end user
is normally stored as a value of an attribute of type
"userCertificate" in the Directory entry that has the DN that is
the subject of the certificate.
$ X.509
(N) An ITU-T Recommendation [X509] that defines a framework to
provide and support data origin authentication and peer entity
authentication, including formats for X.509 public-key
certificates, X.509 attribute certificates, and X.509 CRLs. (The
ISO equivalent is IS 9498-4.) (See: X.500.)
Tutorial: X.509 describes two "levels" of authentication: "simple
authentication" and "strong authentication". It recommends, "While
simple authentication offers some limited protection against
unauthorized access, only strong authentication should be used as
the basis for providing secure services."
$ X.509 attribute certificate
(N) An attribute certificate in the version 1 (v1) format defined
by X.509. (The v1 designation for an X.509 attribute certificate
is disjoint from the v1 designation for an X.509 public-key
certificate, and from the v1 designation for an X.509 CRL.)
Tutorial: An X.509 attribute certificate has a "subject" field,
but the attribute certificate is a separate data structure from
that subject's public-key certificate. A subject may have multiple
attribute certificates associated with each of its public-key
certificates, and an attribute certificate may be issued by a
different CA than the one that issued the associated public-key
certificate.
An X.509 attribute certificate contains a sequence of data items
and has a digital signature that is computed from that sequence.
Besides the signature, an attribute certificate contains items 1
through 9 listed below:
1. version Identifies v1.
2. subject Is one of the following:
2a. baseCertificateID Issuer and serial number of an
X.509 public-key certificate.
2b. subjectName DN of the subject.
3. issuer DN of the issuer (the CA who signed).
4. signature OID of algorithm that signed the cert.
5. serialNumber Certificate serial number;
an integer assigned by the issuer.
6. attCertValidityPeriod Validity period; a pair of UTCTime
values: "not before" and "not after".
Shirey Informational [Page 339]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
7. attributes Sequence of attributes describing the
subject.
8. issuerUniqueId Optional, when a DN is not sufficient.
9. extensions Optional.
$ X.509 certificate
(N) Synonym for "X.509 public-key certificate".
Usage: IDOCs MAY use this term as an abbreviation of "X.509
public-key certificate", but only after using the full term at the
first instance. Otherwise, the term is ambiguous, because X.509
specifies both public-key certificates and attribute certificates.
(See: X.509 attribute certificate, X.509 public-key certificate.)
Deprecated Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as an
abbreviation of "X.509 attribute certificate", because the term is
much more commonly used to mean "X.509 public-key certificate"
and, therefore, is likely to be misunderstood.
$ X.509 certificate revocation list (CRL)
(N) A CRL in one of the formats defined by X.509 -- version 1 (v1)
or version 2 (v2). (The v1 and v2 designations for an X.509 CRL
are disjoint from the v1 and v2 designations for an X.509 public-
key certificate, and from the v1 designation for an X.509
attribute certificate.) (See: certificate revocation.)
Usage: IDOCs SHOULD NOT refer to an X.509 CRL as a digital
certificate; however, note that an X.509 CRL does meet this
Glossary's definition of "digital certificate". That is, like a
digital certificate, an X.509 CRL makes an assertion and is signed
by a CA. But instead of binding a key or other attributes to a
subject, an X.509 CRL asserts that certain previously issued,
X.509 certificates have been revoked.
Tutorial: An X.509 CRL contains a sequence of data items and has a
digital signature computed on that sequence. Besides the
signature, both v1 and v2 contain items 2 through 6b listed below.
Version 2 contains item 1 and may optionally contain 6c and 7.
1. version Optional. If present, identifies v2.
2. signature OID of the algorithm that signed CRL.
3. issuer DN of the issuer (the CA who signed).
4. thisUpdate A UTCTime value.
5. nextUpdate A UTCTime value.
6. revokedCertificates 3-tuples of 6a, 6b, and (optional) 6c:
6a. userCertificate A certificate's serial number.
6b. revocationDate UTCTime value for the revocation date.
6c. crlEntryExtensions Optional.
Shirey Informational [Page 340]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
7. crlExtensions Optional.
$ X.509 public-key certificate
(N) A public-key certificate in one of the formats defined by
X.509 -- version 1 (v1), version 2 (v2), or version 3 (v3). (The
v1 and v2 designations for an X.509 public-key certificate are
disjoint from the v1 and v2 designations for an X.509 CRL, and
from the v1 designation for an X.509 attribute certificate.)
Tutorial: An X.509 public-key certificate contains a sequence of
data items and has a digital signature computed on that sequence.
Besides the signature, all three versions contain items 1 through
7 listed below. Only v2 and v3 certificates may also contain items
8 and 9, and only v3 may contain item 10.
1. version Identifies v1, v2, or v3.
2. serialNumber Certificate serial number;
an integer assigned by the issuer.
3. signature OID of algorithm that was used to
sign the certificate.
4. issuer DN of the issuer (the CA who signed).
5. validity Validity period; a pair of UTCTime
values: "not before" and "not after".
6. subject DN of entity who owns the public key.
7. subjectPublicKeyInfo Public key value and algorithm OID.
8. issuerUniqueIdentifier Defined for v2, v3; optional.
9. subjectUniqueIdentifier Defined for v2, v2; optional.
10. extensions Defined only for v3; optional.
$ X9
(N) See: "Accredited Standards Committee X9" under "ANSI".
$ XML
(N) See: Extensible Markup Language.
$ XML-Signature.
(N) A W3C Recommendation (i.e., approved standard) that specifies
XML syntax and processing rules for creating and representing
digital signatures (based on asymmetric cryptography) that can be
applied to any digital content (i.e., any data object) including
other XML material.
$ Yellow Book
(D) /slang/ Synonym for "Computer Security Requirements: Guidance
for Applying the [U.S.] Department of Defense Trusted Computer
System Evaluation Criteria in Specific Environments" [CSC3] (See:
"first law" under "Courtney's laws".)
Shirey Informational [Page 341]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Deprecated Term: IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term as a synonym for
that or any other document. Instead, use the full proper name of
the document or, in subsequent references, a conventional
abbreviation. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book", Rainbow
Series.)
$ zero-knowledge proof
(I) /cryptography/ A proof-of-possession protocol whereby a system
entity can prove possession of some information to another entity,
without revealing any of that information. (See: proof-of-
possession protocol.)
$ zeroize
1. (I) Synonym for "erase". (See: sanitize.) Usage: Particularly
with regard to erasing keys that are stored in a cryptographic
module.
2. (O) Erase electronically stored data by altering the contents
of the data storage so as to prevent the recovery of the data.
[FP140]
3. (O) "To remove or eliminate the key from a cryptoequipment or
fill device." [C4009]
Usage: The phrase "zeroize the device" normally is used to mean
erasing all keys stored in the device, but sometimes means erasing
all keying material in the device, or all cryptographic
information in the device, or even all sensitive information in
the device.
$ zombie
(I) /slang/ An Internet host computer that has been
surreptitiously penetrated by an intruder that installed malicious
daemon software to cause the host to operate as an accomplice in
attacking other hosts, particularly in distributed attacks that
attempt denial of service through flooding.
Deprecated Usage: Other cultures likely use different metaphorical
terms (such as "robot") for this concept, and some use this term
for different concepts. Therefore, to avoid international
misunderstanding, IDOCs SHOULD NOT use this term. Instead, use
"compromised, coopted computer" or other explicitly descriptive
terminology. (See: Deprecated Usage under "Green Book".)
$ zone of control
(O) /EMSEC/ Synonym for "inspectable space". [C4009] (See:
TEMPEST.)
Shirey Informational [Page 342]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
5. Security Considerations
This document mainly defines security terms and recommends how to use
them. It also provides limited tutorial information about security
aspects of Internet protocols, but it does not describe in detail the
vulnerabilities of, or threats to, specific protocols and does not
definitively describe mechanisms that protect specific protocols.
6. Normative Reference
[R2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
7. Informative References
This Glossary focuses on the Internet Standards Process. Therefore,
this set of informative references emphasizes international,
governmental, and industrial standards documents. Some RFCs that are
especially relevant to Internet security are mentioned in Glossary
entries in square brackets (e.g., "[R1457]" in the entry for
"security label") and are listed here; some other RFCs are mentioned
in parentheses (e.g., "(RFC 959)" in the entry for "File Transport
Protocol") but are not listed here.
[A1523] American National Standards Institute, "American National
Standard Telecom Glossary", ANSI T1.523-2001.
[A3092] ---, "American National Standard Data Encryption Algorithm",
ANSI X3.92-1981, 30 December 1980.
[A9009] ---, "Financial Institution Message Authentication
(Wholesale)", ANSI X9.9-1986, 15 August 1986.
[A9017] ---, "Financial Institution Key Management (Wholesale)",
X9.17, 4 April 1985. (Defines procedures for manual and
automated management of keying material and uses DES to
provide key management for a variety of operational
environments.)
[A9042] ---, "Public key Cryptography for the Financial Service
Industry: Agreement of Symmetric Keys Using Diffie-Hellman
and MQV Algorithms", X9.42, 29 January 1999. (See: Diffie-
Hellman-Merkle.)
[A9052] ---, "Triple Data Encryption Algorithm Modes of Operation",
X9.52-1998, ANSI approval 9 November 1998.
Shirey Informational [Page 343]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[A9062] ---, "Public Key Cryptography for the Financial Services
Industry: The Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm
(ECDSA)", X9.62-1998, ANSI approval 7 January 1999.
[A9063] ---, "Public Key Cryptography for the Financial Services
Industry: Key Agreement and Key Transport Using Elliptic
Curve Cryptography", X9.63-2001.
[ACM] Association for Computing Machinery, "Communications of the
ACM", July 1998 issue with: M. Yeung, "Digital
Watermarking"; N. Memom and P. Wong, "Protecting Digital
Media Content"; and S. Craver, B.-L. Yeo, and M. Yeung,
"Technical Trials and Legal Tribulations".
[Ande] Anderson, J., "Computer Security Technology Planning Study",
ESD-TR-73-51, Vols. I and II, USAF Electronics Systems Div.,
Bedford, MA, October 1972. (Available as AD-758206/772806,
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.)
[ANSI] American National Standards Institute, "Role Based Access
Control", Secretariat, Information Technology Industry
Council, BSR INCITS 359, DRAFT, 10 November 2003.
[Army] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)
and Tempest Protection for Facilities", EP 1110-3-2, 31
December 1990.
[B1822] Bolt Baranek and Newman Inc., "Appendix H: Interfacing a
Host to a Private Line Interface", in "Specifications for
the Interconnection of a Host and an IMP", BBN Report No.
1822, revised, December 1983.
[B4799] ---, "A History of the Arpanet: The First Decade", BBN
Report No. 4799, April 1981.
[Bell] Bell, D. and L. LaPadula, "Secure Computer Systems:
Mathematical Foundations and Model", M74-244, The MITRE
Corporation, Bedford, MA, May 1973. (Available as AD-771543,
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.)
[Biba] K. Biba, "Integrity Considerations for Secure Computer
Systems", ESD-TR-76-372, USAF Electronic Systems Division,
Bedford, MA, April 1977.
[BN89] Brewer, D. and M. Nash, "The Chinese wall security policy",
in "Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy",
May 1989, pp. 205-214.
Shirey Informational [Page 344]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[BS7799] British Standards Institution, "Information Security
Management, Part 1: Code of Practice for Information
Security Management", BS 7799-1:1999, 15 May 1999.
---, "Information Security Management, Part 2: Specification
for Information Security Management Systems", BS 7799-
2:1999, 15 May 1999.
[C4009] Committee on National Security Systems (U.S. Government),
"National Information Assurance (IA) Glossary", CNSS
Instruction No. 4009, revised June 2006.
[CCIB] Common Criteria Implementation Board, "Common Criteria for
Information Technology Security Evaluation, Part 1:
Introduction and General Model", version 2.0, CCIB-98-026,
May 1998.
[Chau] D. Chaum, "Untraceable Electronic Mail, Return Addresses,
and Digital Pseudonyms", in "Communications of the ACM",
vol. 24, no. 2, February 1981, pp. 84-88.
[Cheh] Cheheyl, M., Gasser, M., Huff, G., and J. Millen, "Verifying
Security", in "ACM Computing Surveys", vol. 13, no. 3,
September 1981, pp. 279-339.
[Chris] Chrissis, M. et al, 1993. "SW-CMM [Capability Maturity Model
for Software Version", Release 3.0, Software Engineering
Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, August 1996.
[CIPSO] Trusted Systems Interoperability Working Group, "Common IP
Security Option", version 2.3, 9 March 1993.
[Clark] Clark, D. and D. Wilson, "A Comparison of Commercial and
Military computer Security Policies", in "Proceedings of the
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy", April 1987, pp.
184-194.
[Cons] NSA, "Consistency Instruction Manual for Development of U.S.
Government Protection Profiles for Use in Basic Robustness
Environments", Release 2.0, 1 March 2004
[CORBA] Object Management Group, Inc., "CORBAservices: Common Object
Service Specification", December 1998.
[CSC1] U.S. DoD Computer Security Center, "Department of Defense
Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria", CSC-STD-001-
83, 15 August 1983. (Superseded by [DoD1].)
Shirey Informational [Page 345]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[CSC2] ---, "Department of Defense Password Management Guideline",
CSC-STD-002-85, 12 April 1985.
[CSC3] ---, "Computer Security Requirements: Guidance for Applying
the Department of Defense Trusted Computer System Evaluation
Criteria in Specific Environments", CSC-STD-003-85, 25 June
1985.
[CSOR] U.S. Department of Commerce, "General Procedures for
Registering Computer Security Objects", National Institute
of Standards Interagency Report 5308, December 1993.
[Daem] Daemen, J. and V. Rijmen, "Rijndael, the advanced encryption
standard", in "Dr. Dobb's Journal", vol. 26, no. 3, March
2001, pp. 137-139.
[DC6/9] Director of Central Intelligence, "Physical Security
Standards for Sensitive Compartmented Information
Facilities", DCI Directive 6/9, 18 November 2002.
[Denn] Denning, D., "A Lattice Model of Secure Information Flow",
in "Communications of the ACM", vol. 19, no. 5, May 1976,
pp. 236-243.
[Denns] Denning, D. and P. Denning, "Data Security", in "ACM
Computing Surveys", vol. 11, no. 3, September 1979, pp. 227-
249.
[DH76] Diffie, W. and M. Hellman, "New Directions in Cryptography",
in "IEEE Transactions on Information Theory", vol. IT-22,
no. 6, November 1976, pp. 644-654. (See: Diffie-Hellman-
Merkle.)
[DoD1] U.S. DoD, "Department of Defense Trusted Computer System
Evaluation Criteria", DoD 5200.28-STD, 26 December 1985.
(Supersedes [CSC1].) (Superseded by DoD Directive 8500.1.)
[DoD4] ---, "NSA Key Recovery Assessment Criteria", 8 June 1998.
[DoD5] ---, Directive 5200.1, "DoD Information Security Program",
13 December 1996.
[DoD6] ---, "Department of Defense Technical Architecture Framework
for Information Management, Volume 6: Department of Defense
(DoD) Goal Security Architecture", Defense Information
Systems Agency, Center for Standards, version 3.0, 15 April
1996.
Shirey Informational [Page 346]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[DoD7] ---, "X.509 Certificate Policy for the United States
Department of Defense", version 7, 18 December 2002.
(Superseded by [DoD9].)
[DoD9] ---, "X.509 Certificate Policy for the United States
Department of Defense", version 9, 9 February 2005.
[DoD10] ---, "DoD Architecture Framework, Version 1: Deskbook", 9
February 2004.
[DSG] American Bar Association, "Digital Signature Guidelines:
Legal Infrastructure for Certification Authorities and
Secure Electronic Commerce", Chicago, IL, 1 August 1996.
(See: [PAG].)
[ElGa] El Gamal, T., "A Public-Key Cryptosystem and a Signature
Scheme Based on Discrete Logarithms", in "IEEE Transactions
on Information Theory", vol. IT-31, no. 4, 1985, pp. 469-
472.
[EMV1] Europay International S.A., MasterCard International
Incorporated, and Visa International Service Association,
"EMV '96 Integrated Circuit Card Specification for Payment
Systems", version 3.1.1, 31 May 1998.
[EMV2] ---, "EMV '96 Integrated Circuit Card Terminal Specification
for Payment Systems", version 3.1.1, 31 May 1998.
[EMV3] ---, "EMV '96 Integrated Circuit Card Application
Specification for Payment Systems", version 3.1.1, 31 May
1998.
[F1037] U.S. General Services Administration, "Glossary of
Telecommunications Terms", FED STD 1037C, 7 August 1996.
[For94] Ford, W., "Computer Communications Security: Principles,
Standard Protocols and Techniques", ISBN 0-13-799453-2,
1994.
[For97] --- and M. Baum, "Secure Electronic Commerce: Building the
Infrastructure for Digital Signatures and Encryption", ISBN
0-13-476342-4, 1994.
[FP001] U.S. Department of Commerce, "Code for Information
Interchange", Federal Information Processing Standards
Publication (FIPS PUB) 1, 1 November 1968.
Shirey Informational [Page 347]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[FP031] ---, "Guidelines for Automatic Data Processing Physical
Security and Risk Management", FIPS PUB 31, June 1974.
[FP039] ---, "Glossary for Computer Systems Security", FIPS PUB 39,
15 February 1976.
[FP041] ---, "Computer Security Guidelines for Implementing the
Privacy Act of 1974", FIPS PUB 41, 30 May 1975.
[FP046] ---, "Data Encryption Standard (DES)", FIPS PUB 46-3, 25
October 1999.
[FP074] ---, "Data Encryption Standard (DES)", FIPS PUB 46-3, 25
October 1999.
[FP081] ---, "DES Modes of Operation", FIPS PUB 81, 2 December 1980.
[FP087] ---, "Guidelines for ADP Contingency Planning", FIPS PUB 87,
27 March 1981.
[FP102] ---, "Guideline for Computer Security Certification and
Accreditation", FIPS PUB 102, 27 September 1983.
[FP113] ---, "Computer Data Authentication", FIPS PUB 113, 30 May
1985.
[FP140] ---, "Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules", FIPS
PUB 140-2, 25 May 2001; with change notice 4, 3 December
2002.
[FP151] ---, "Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX) -- System
Application Program Interface [C Language]", FIPS PUB 151-2,
12 May 1993
[FP180] ---, "Secure Hash Standard", FIPS PUB 180-2, August 2000;
with change notice 1, 25 February 2004.
[FP185] ---, "Escrowed Encryption Standard", FIPS PUB 185, 9
February 1994.
[FP186] ---, "Digital Signature Standard (DSS)", FIPS PUB 186-2, 27
June 2000; with change notice 1, 5 October 2001.
[FP188] ---, "Standard Security Label for Information Transfer",
FIPS PUB 188, 6 September 1994.
[FP191] ---, "Guideline for the Analysis of Local Area Network
Security", FIPS PUB 191, 9 November 1994.
Shirey Informational [Page 348]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[FP197] ---, "Advanced Encryption Standard", FIPS PUB 197, 26
November 2001.
[FP199] ---, "Standards for Security Categorization of Federal
Information and Information Systems ", FIPS PUB 199,
December 2003.
[FPKI] ---, "Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Technical
Specifications: Part A -- Technical Concept of Operations",
NIST, 4 September 1998.
[Gass] Gasser, M., "Building a Secure Computer System", Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1988, ISBN 0-442-
23022-2.
[Gray] Gray, J. and A. Reuter, "Transaction Processing: Concepts
and Techniques", Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1993.
[Hafn] Hafner, K. and M. Lyon, "Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The
Origins of the Internet", Simon & Schuster, New York, 1996.
[Huff] Huff, G., "Trusted Computer Systems -- Glossary", MTR 8201,
The MITRE Corporation, March 1981.
[I3166] International Standards Organization, "Codes for the
Representation of Names of Countries and Their Subdivisions,
Part 1: Country Codes", ISO 3166-1:1997.
---, "Codes for the Representation of Names of Countries and
Their Subdivisions, Part 2: Country Subdivision Codes",
ISO/DIS 3166-2.
---, "Codes for the Representation of Names of Countries and
Their Subdivisions, Part 3: Codes for Formerly Used Names of
Countries", ISO/DIS 3166-3.
[I7498-1] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection Reference Model, [Part 1:] Basic Reference
Model", ISO/IEC 7498-1. (Equivalent to ITU-T Recommendation
X.200.)
[I7498-2] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection Reference Model, Part 2: Security
Architecture", ISO/IEC 7499-2.
[I7498-4] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection Reference Model, Part 4: Management
Framework", ISO/IEC 7498-4.
Shirey Informational [Page 349]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[I7812] ---, "Identification cards -- Identification of Issuers,
Part 1: Numbering System", ISO/IEC 7812-1:1993
---, "Identification cards -- Identification of Issuers,
Part 2: Application and Registration Procedures", ISO/IEC
7812-2:1993.
[I8073] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection, Transport Protocol Specification", ISO IS
8073.
[I8327] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection, Session Protocol Specification", ISO IS
8327.
[I8473] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection, Protocol for Providing the Connectionless
Network Service", ISO IS 8473.
[I8802-2] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Local Area
Networks, Part 2: Logical Link Control", ISO IS 8802-2.
(Equivalent to IEEE 802.2.)
[I8802-3] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Local Area
Networks, Part 3: Carrier Sense Multiple Access with
Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access Method and Physical
Layer Specifications", ISO IS 8802-3. (Equivalent to IEEE
802.3.)
[I8823] ---, "Information Processing Systems -- Open Systems
Interconnection -- Connection-Oriented Presentation Protocol
Specification", ISO IS 8823.
[I9945] "Portable Operating System Interface for Computer
Environments", ISO/IEC 9945-1: 1990.
[IATF] NSA, "Information Assurance Technical Framework", Release 3,
NSA, September 2000. (See: IATF.)
[IDSAN] ---, "Intrusion Detection System Analyzer Protection
Profile", version 1.1, NSA, 10 December 2001.
[IDSSC] ---, "Intrusion Detection System Scanner Protection
Profile", version 1.1, NSA, 10 December 2001.
[IDSSE] ---, "Intrusion Detection System Sensor Protection Profile",
version 1.1, NSA, 10 December 2001.
Shirey Informational [Page 350]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[IDSSY] ---, "Intrusion Detection System", version 1.4, NSA, 4
February 2002.
[Ioan] Ioannidis, J. and M. Blaze, "The Architecture and
Implementation of Network Layer Security in UNIX", in "UNIX
Security IV Symposium", October 1993, pp. 29-39.
[ITSEC] "Information Technology Security Evaluation Criteria
(ITSEC): Harmonised Criteria of France, Germany, the
Netherlands, and the United Kingdom", version 1.2, U.K.
Department of Trade and Industry, June 1991.
[JP1] U.S. DoD, "Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and
Associated Terms", Joint Publication 1-02, as amended
through 13 June 2007.
[John] Johnson, N. and S. Jajodia, "Exploring Steganography; Seeing
the Unseen", in "IEEE Computer", February 1998, pp. 26-34.
[Kahn] Kahn, D., "The Codebreakers: The Story of Secret Writing",
The Macmillan Company, New York, 1967.
[Knut] Knuth, D., Chapter 3 ("Random Numbers") of Volume 2
("Seminumerical Algorithms") of "The Art of Computer
Programming", Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1969.
[Kuhn] Kuhn, M. and R. Anderson, "Soft Tempest: Hidden Data
Transmission Using Electromagnetic Emanations", in David
Aucsmith, ed., "Information Hiding, Second International
Workshop, IH'98", Portland, Oregon, USA, 15-17 April 1998,
LNCS 1525, Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65386-4, pp. 124-142.
[Land] Landwehr, C., "Formal Models for Computer Security", in "ACM
Computing Surveys", vol. 13, no. 3, September 1981, pp. 247-
278.
[Larm] Larmouth, J., "ASN.1 Complete", Open System Solutions, 1999
(a freeware book).
[M0404] U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "E-Authentication
Guidance for Federal Agencies", Memorandum M-04-04, 16
December 2003.
[Mene] Menezes, A. et al, "Some Key Agreement Protocols Providing
Implicit Authentication", in "The 2nd Workshop on Selected
Areas in Cryptography", 1995.
Shirey Informational [Page 351]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[Moor] Moore, A. et al, "Attack Modeling for Information Security
and Survivability", Carnegie Mellon University / Software
Engineering Institute, CMU/SEI-2001-TN-001, March 2001.
[Murr] Murray, W., "Courtney's Laws of Security", in "Infosecurity
News", March/April 1993, p. 65.
[N4001] National Security Telecommunications and Information System
Security Committee, "Controlled Cryptographic Items",
NSTISSI No. 4001, 25 March 1985.
[N4006] ---, "Controlled Cryptographic Items", NSTISSI No. 4006, 2
December 1991.
[N7003] ---, "Protective Distribution Systems", NSTISSI No. 7003, 13
December 1996.
[NCS01] National Computer Security Center, "A Guide to Understanding
Audit in Trusted Systems", NCSC-TG-001, 1 June 1988. (See:
Rainbow Series.)
[NCS03] ---, "Information System Security Policy Guideline", I942-
TR-003, version 1, July 1994. (See: Rainbow Series.)
[NCS04] ---, "Glossary of Computer Security Terms", NCSC-TG-004,
version 1, 21 October 1988. (See: Rainbow Series.)
[NCS05] ---, "Trusted Network Interpretation of the Trusted Computer
System Evaluation Criteria", NCSC-TG-005, version 1, 31 July
1987. (See: Rainbow Series.)
[NCS25] ---, "A Guide to Understanding Data Remanence in Automated
Information Systems", NCSC-TG-025, version 2, September
1991. (See: Rainbow Series.)
[NCSSG] National Computer Security Center, "COMPUSECese: Computer
Security Glossary", NCSC-WA-001-85, Edition 1, 1 October
1985. (See: Rainbow Series.)
[NRC91] National Research Council, "Computers At Risk: Safe
Computing in the Information Age", National Academy Press,
1991.
[NRC98] Schneider, F., ed., "Trust in Cyberspace", National Research
Council, National Academy of Sciences, 1998.
[Padl] Padlipsky, M., "The Elements of Networking Style", 1985,
ISBN 0-13-268111-0.
Shirey Informational [Page 352]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[PAG] American Bar Association, "PKI Assessment Guidelines",
version 1.0, 10 May 2002. (See: [DSG].)
[Park] Parker, D., "Computer Security Management", ISBN 0-8359-
0905-0, 1981
[Perr] Perrine, T. et al, "An Overview of the Kernelized Secure
Operating System (KSOS)", in "Proceedings of the 7th DoD/NBS
Computer Security Conference", 24-26 September 1984.
[PGP] Garfinkel, S.. "PGP: Pretty Good Privacy", O'Reilly &
Associates, Inc., Sebastopol, CA, 1995.
[PKCS] Kaliski Jr., B., "An Overview of the PKCS Standards", RSA
Data Security, Inc., 3 June 1991.
[PKC05] RSA Laboratories, "PKCS #5: Password-Based Encryption
Standard ", version 1.5, 1 November 1993. (See: RFC 2898.)
[PKC07] ---, "PKCS #7: Cryptographic Message Syntax Standard",
version 1.5, 1 November 1993. (See: RFC 2315.)
[PKC10] ---, "PKCS #10: Certification Request Syntax Standard",
version 1.0, 1 November 1993.
[PKC11] ---, "PKCS #11: Cryptographic Token Interface Standard",
version 1.0, 28 April 1995.
[PKC12] ---, "PKCS #12: Personal Information Exchange Syntax",
version 1.0, 24 June 1995.
[R1108] Kent, S., "U.S. Department of Defense Security Options for
the Internet Protocol", RFC 1108, November 1991.
[R1135] Reynolds, J., "The Helminthiasis of the Internet", RFC 1135,
December 1989
[R1208] Jacobsen, O. and D. Lynch, "A Glossary of Networking Terms",
RFC 1208, March 1991.
[R1281] Pethia, R., Crocker, S., and B. Fraser, "Guidelines for
Secure Operation of the Internet", RFC 1281, November 1991.
[R1319] Kaliski, B., "The MD2 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1319,
April 1992.
[R1320] Rivest, R., "The MD4 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1320,
April 1992.
Shirey Informational [Page 353]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[R1321] ---, "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321, April
1992.
[R1334] Lloyd, B. and W. Simpson, "PPP Authentication Protocols",
RFC 1334, October 1992.
[R1413] St. Johns, M., "Identification Protocol", RFC 1413, February
1993.
[R1421] Linn, J., "Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail,
Part I: Message Encryption and Authentication Procedures",
RFC 1421, February 1993.
[R1422] Kent, S., "Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail,
Part II: Certificate-Based Key Management", RFC 1422,
February 1993.
[R1455] Eastlake 3rd, D., "Physical Link Security Type of Service",
RFC 1455, May 1993.
[R1457] Housley, R., "Security Label Framework for the Internet",
RFC 1457, May 1993.
[R1492] Finseth, C., "An Access Control Protocol, Sometimes Called
TACACS", RFC 1492, July 1993.
[R1507] Kaufman, C., "DASS: Distributed Authentication Security
Service", RFC 1507, September 1993.
[R1731] Myers, J., "IMAP4 Authentication Mechanisms", RFC 1731,
December 1994.
[R1734] ---, "POP3 AUTHentication Command", RFC 1734, Dec, 1994.
[R1760] Haller, N., "The S/KEY One-Time Password System", RFC 1760,
February 1995.
[R1824] Danisch, H., "The Exponential Security System TESS: An
Identity-Based Cryptographic Protocol for Authenticated Key-
Exchange (E.I.S.S.-Report 1995/4)", RFC 1824, August 1995.
[R1828] Metzger, P. and W. Simpson, "IP Authentication using Keyed
MD5", RFC 1828, August 1995.
[R1829] Karn, P., Metzger, P., and W. Simpson, "The ESP DES-CBC
Transform", RFC 1829, August 1995.
Shirey Informational [Page 354]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[R1848] Crocker, S., Freed, N., Galvin, J., and S. Murphy, "MIME
Object Security Services", RFC 1848, October 1995.
[R1851] Karn, P., Metzger, P., and W. Simpson, "The ESP Triple DES
Transform", RFC 1851, September 1995.
[R1928] Leech, M., Ganis, M., Lee, Y., Kuris, R., Koblas, D., and L.
Jones, "SOCKS Protocol Version 5", RFC 1928, March 1996.
[R1958] Carpenter, B., "Architectural Principles of the Internet",
RFC 1958, June 1996.
[R1983] Malkin, G., "Internet Users' Glossary", FYI 18, RFC 1983,
August 1996.
[R1994] Simpson, W., "PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication
Protocol (CHAP)", RFC 1994, August 1996.
[R2078] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
Interface, Version 2", RFC 2078, January 1997. (Superseded
by RFC 2743.)
[R2084] Bossert, G., Cooper, S., and W. Drummond, "Considerations
for Web Transaction Security", RFC 2084, January 1997.
[R2104] Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-
Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104, February
1997.
[R2144] Adams, C., "The CAST-128 Encryption Algorithm", RFC 2144,
May 1997.
[R2179] Gwinn, A., "Network Security For Trade Shows", RFC 2179,
July 1997.
[R2195] Klensin, J., Catoe, R., and P. Krumviede, "IMAP/POP
AUTHorize Extension for Simple Challenge/Response", RFC
2195, September 1997.
[R2196] Fraser, B., "Site Security Handbook", FYI 8, RFC 2196,
September 1997.
[R2202] Cheng, P. and R. Glenn, "Test Cases for HMAC-MD5 and HMAC-
SHA-1", RFC 2202, Sep. 1997.
[R2222] Myers, J., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer
(SASL)", RFC 2222, October 1997.
Shirey Informational [Page 355]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[R2289] Haller, N., Metz, C., Nesser, P., and M. Straw, "A One-Time
Password System", STD 61, RFC 2289, February 1998.
[R2323] Ramos, A., "IETF Identification and Security Guidelines",
RFC 2323, 1 April 1998. (Intended for humorous entertainment
-- "please laugh loud and hard" -- and does not contain
serious security information.)
[R2350] Brownlee, N. and E. Guttman, "Expectations for Computer
Security Incident Response", BCP 21, RFC 2350, June 1998.
[R2356] Montenegro, G. and V. Gupta, "Sun's SKIP Firewall Traversal
for Mobile IP", RFC 2356, June 1998.
[R2401] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.
[R2402] ---, "IP Authentication Header", RFC 2402, November 1998.
[R2403] Madson, C. and R. Glenn, "The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP
and AH", RFC 2403, November 1998.
[R2404] ---, "The Use of HMAC-SHA-1-96 within ESP and AH", RFC 2404,
November 1998.
[R2405] Madson, C. and N. Doraswamy, "The ESP DES-CBC Cipher
Algorithm With Explicit IV", RFC 2405, November 1998.
[R2406] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Security Payload
(ESP)", RFC 2406, November 1998.
[R2407] Piper, D. "The Internet IP Security Domain of Interpretation
for ISAKMP", RFC 2407, November 1998.
[R2408] Maughan, D., Schertler, M., Schneider, M., and J. Turner,
"Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol
(ISAKMP)", RFC 2408, November 1998.
[R2410] Glenn, R. and S. Kent, "The NULL Encryption Algorithm and
Its Use With IPsec", RFC 2410, November 1998.
[R2412] Orman, H., "The OAKLEY Key Determination Protocol", RFC
2412, November 1998.
[R2451] Pereira, R. and R. Adams, "The ESP CBC-Mode Cipher
Algorithms", RFC 2451, November 1998.
Shirey Informational [Page 356]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[R2504] Guttman, E., Leong, L., and G. Malkin, "Users' Security
Handbook", RFC 2504, February 1999.
[R2560] Myers, M., Ankney, R., Malpani, A., Galperin, S., and C.
Adams, "X.509 Internet Public Key Infrastructure Online
Certificate Status Protocol - OCSP", RFC 2560, June 1999.
[R2612] Adams, C. and J. Gilchrist, "The CAST-256 Encryption
Algorithm", RFC 2612, June 1999.
[R2628] Smyslov, V., "Simple Cryptographic Program Interface (Crypto
API)", RFC 2628, June 1999.
[R2631] Rescorla, E., "Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method", RFC
2631, June 1999. (See: Diffie-Hellman-Merkle.)
[R2634] Hoffman, P., "Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME", RFC
2634, June 1999.
[R2635] Hambridge, S. and A. Lunde, "DON'T SPEW: A Set of Guidelines
for Mass Unsolicited Mailings and Postings", RFC 2635, June
1999.
[R2660] Rescorla, E. and A. Schiffman, "The Secure HyperText
Transfer Protocol", RFC 2660, August 1999.
[R2743] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000.
[R2773] Housley, R., Yee, P., and W. Nace, "Encryption using KEA and
SKIPJACK", RFC 2773, February 2000.
[R2801] Burdett, D., "Internet Open Trading Protocol - IOTP, Version
1.0", RFC 2801, April 2000.
[R2827] Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering:
Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source
Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000.
[R2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, "Remote
Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 2865,
June 2000.
[R3060] Moore, B., Ellesson, E., Strassner, J., and A. Westerinen,
"Policy Core Information Model -- Version 1 Specification",
RFC 3060, February 2001.
Shirey Informational [Page 357]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[R3198] Westerinen, A., Schnizlein, J., Strassner, J., Scherling,
M., Quinn, B., Herzog, S., Huynh, A., Carlson, M., Perry,
J., and S. Waldbusser, "Terminology for Policy-Based
Management", RFC 3198, November 2001.
[R3280] Housley, R., Polk, W., Ford, W., and D. Solo, "Internet
X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate
Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 3280, April 2002.
[R3547] Baugher, M., Weis, B., Hardjono, T., and H. Harney, "Group
Domain of Interpretation", RFC 3547, July 2003.
[R3552] Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC Text
on Security Considerations", RFC 3552, July 2003.
[R3647] Chokhani, S., Ford, W., Sabett, R., Merrill, C., and S. Wu,
"Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate Policy
and Certification Practices Framework", RFC 3647, November
2003.
[R3739] Santesson, S., Nystrom, M., and T. Polk, "Internet X.509
Public Key Infrastructure: Qualified Certificates Profile",
RFC 3739, March 2004.
[R3740] Hardjono, T. and B. Weis, "The Multicast Group Security
Architecture", RFC 3740, March 2004.
[R3748] Aboba, B., Blunk, L., Vollbrecht, J., Carlson, J., and H.
Levkowetz, "Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)", RFC
3748, June 2004.
[R3766] Orman, H. and P. Hoffman, "Determining Strengths For Public
Keys Used For Exchanging Symmetric Keys", BCP 86, RFC 3766,
April 2004.
[R3820] Tuecke, S., Welch, V., Engert, D., Pearlman, L., and M.
Thompson, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure (PKI)
Proxy Certificate Profile", RFC 3820, June 2004.
[R3851] Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions
(S/MIME) Version 3.1 Message Specification", RFC 3851, July
2004.
[R3871] Jones, G., "Operational Security Requirements for Large
Internet Service Provider (ISP) IP Network Infrastructure",
RFC 3871, September 2004.
Shirey Informational [Page 358]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[R4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC
4033, March 2005.
[R4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions",
RFC 4034, March 2005.
[R4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005.
[R4086] Eastlake, D., 3rd, Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, "Randomness
Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086, June 2005.
[R4120] Neuman, C., Yu, T., Hartman, S., and K. Raeburn, "The
Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120,
July 2005.
[R4158] Cooper, M., Dzambasow, Y., Hesse, P., Joseph, S., and R.
Nicholas, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure:
Certification Path Building", RFC 4158, September 2005.
[R4210] Adams, C., Farrell, S., Kause, T., and T. Mononen, "Internet
X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate Management
Protocol (CMP)", RFC 4210, September 2005.
[R4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the Internet
Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005.
[R4302] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 4302, December
2005.
[R4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", RFC
4303, December 2005.
[R4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", RFC
4306, December 2005.
[R4346] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.1", RFC 4346, April 2006.
[R4422] Melnikov, A. and K. Zeilenga, "Simple Authentication and
Security Layer (SASL)", RFC 4422, June 2006.
Shirey Informational [Page 359]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[Raym] Raymond, E., ed., "The On-Line Hacker Jargon File", version
4.0.0, 24 July 1996. (See: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon
for the latest version. Also, "The New Hacker's Dictionary",
3rd edition, MIT Press, September 1996, ISBN 0-262-68092-0.)
[Roge] Rogers, H., "An Overview of the CANEWARE Program", in
"Proceedings of the 10th National Computer Security
Conference", NIST and NCSC, September 1987.
[RSA78] Rivest, R., A. Shamir, and L. Adleman, "A Method for
Obtaining Digital Signatures and Public-Key Cryptosystems",
in "Communications of the ACM", vol. 21, no. 2, February
1978, pp. 120-126.
[RSCG] NSA, "Router Security Configuration Guide: Principles and
Guidance for Secure Configuration of IP Routers, with
Detailed Instructions for Cisco Systems Routers", version
1.1c, C4-040R-02, 15 December 2005, available at
http://www.nsa.gov/snac/routers/C4-040R-02.pdf.
[Russ] Russell, D. et al, Chapter 10 ("TEMPEST") of "Computer
Security Basics", ISBN 0-937175-71-4, 1991.
[SAML] Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information
Standards (OASIS), "Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS
Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)", version 1.1, 2
September 2003.
[Sand] Sandhu, R. et al, "Role-Based Access Control Models", in
"IEEE Computer", vol. 29, no. 2, February 1996, pp. 38-47.
[Schn] Schneier, B., "Applied Cryptography Second Edition", John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1996.
[SDNS3] U.S. DoD, NSA, "Secure Data Network Systems, Security
Protocol 3 (SP3)", document SDN.301, Revision 1.5, 15 May
1989.
[SDNS4] ---, "Secure Data Network Systems, Security Protocol 4
(SP4)", document SDN.401, Revision 1.2, 12 July 1988.
[SDNS7] ---, "Secure Data Network Systems, Message Security Protocol
(MSP)", SDN.701, Revision 4.0, 7 June 1996, with
"Corrections to Message Security Protocol, SDN.701, Rev 4.0,
96-06-07", 30 Aug, 1996.
Shirey Informational [Page 360]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[SET1] MasterCard and Visa, "SET Secure Electronic Transaction
Specification, Book 1: Business Description", version 1.0,
31 May 1997.
[SET2] ---, "SET Secure Electronic Transaction Specification, Book
2: Programmer's Guide", version 1.0, 31 May 1997.
[SKEME] Krawczyk, H., "SKEME: A Versatile Secure Key Exchange
Mechanism for Internet", in "Proceedings of the 1996
Symposium on Network and Distributed Systems Security".
[SKIP] "SKIPJACK and KEA Algorithm Specifications", version 2.0, 22
May 1998, and "Clarification to the SKIPJACK Algorithm
Specification", 9 May 2002 (available from NIST Computer
Security Resource Center).
[SP12] NIST, "An Introduction to Computer Security: The NIST
Handbook", Special Publication 800-12.
[SP14] Swanson, M. et al (NIST), "Generally Accepted Principles and
Practices for Security Information Technology Systems",
Special Publication 800-14, September 1996.
[SP15] Burr, W. et al (NIST), "Minimum Interoperability
Specification for PKI Components (MISPC), Version 1",
Special Publication 800-15, September 1997.
[SP22] Rukhin, A. et al (NIST), "A Statistical Test Suite for
Random and Pseudorandom Number Generators for Cryptographic
Applications", Special Publication 800-15, 15 May 2001.
[SP27] Stoneburner, G. et al (NIST), "Engineering Principles for
Information Technology Security (A Baseline for Achieving
Security)", Special Publication 800-27 Rev A, June 2004.
[SP28] Jansen, W. (NIST), "Guidelines on Active Content and Mobile
Code", Special Publication 800-28, October 2001.
[SP30] Stoneburner, G. et al (NIST), "Risk Management Guide for
Information Technology Systems", Special Publication 800-30,
October 2001.
[SP31] Bace, R. et al (NIST), "Intrusion Detection Systems",
Special Publication 800-31.
[SP32] Kuhn, D. (NIST), "Introduction to Public Key Technology and
the Federal PKI Infrastructure ", Special Publication
800-32, 26 February 2001.
Shirey Informational [Page 361]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[SP33] Stoneburner, G. (NIST), "Underlying Technical Models for
Information Technology Security", Special Publication
800-33, December 2001.
[SP37] Ross, R. et al (NIST), "Guide for the Security Certification
and Accreditation of Federal Information Systems", Special
Publication 800-37, May 2004.
[SP38A] Dworkin, M. (NIST), "Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes
of Operation: Methods and Techniques", Special Publication
800-38A, 2001 Edition, December 2001.
[SP38B] ---, "Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation:
The CMAC Mode for Authentication", Special Publication
800-38B, May 2005.
[SP38C] ---, "Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation:
The CCM Mode for Authentication and Confidentiality",
Special Publication 800-38C, May 2004.
[SP41] Wack, J. et al (NIST), "Guidelines on Firewalls and Firewall
Policy", Special Publication 800-41, January 2002.
[SP42] ---, "Guideline on Network Security Testing", Special
Publication 800-42, October 2003.
[SP56] NIST, "Recommendations on Key Establishment Schemes", Draft
2.0, Special Publication 800-63, January 2003.
[SP57] ---, "Recommendation for Key Management", Part 1 "General
Guideline" and Part 2 "Best Practices for Key Management
Organization", Special Publication 800-57, DRAFT, January
2003.
[SP61] Grance, T. et al (NIST), "Computer Security Incident
Handling Guide", Special Publication 800-57, January 2003.
[SP63] Burr, W. et al (NIST), "Electronic Authentication
Guideline", Special Publication 800-63, June 2004
[SP67] Barker, W. (NIST), "Recommendation for the Triple Data
Encryption Algorithm (TDEA) Block Cipher", Special
Publication 800-67, May 2004
[Stal] Stallings, W., "Local Networks", 1987, ISBN 0-02-415520-9.
Shirey Informational [Page 362]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[Stei] Steiner, J. et al, "Kerberos: An Authentication Service for
Open Network Systems", in "Usenix Conference Proceedings",
February 1988.
[Weis] Weissman, C., "Blacker: Security for the DDN: Examples of A1
Security Engineering Trades", in "Symposium on Security and
Privacy", IEEE Computer Society Press, May 1992, pp. 286-
292.
[X400] International Telecommunications Union -- Telecommunication
Standardization Sector (formerly "CCITT"), Recommendation
X.400, "Message Handling Services: Message Handling System
and Service Overview".
[X419] ---, "Message Handling Systems: Protocol Specifications",
ITU-T Recommendation X.419. (Equivalent to ISO 10021-6).
[X420] ---, "Message Handling Systems: Interpersonal Messaging
System", ITU-T Recommendation X.420. (Equivalent to ISO
10021-7.).
[X500] ---, Recommendation X.500, "Information Technology -- Open
Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Overview of
Concepts, Models, and Services". (Equivalent to ISO 9594-1.)
[X501] ---, Recommendation X.501, "Information Technology -- Open
Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Models".
[X509] ---, Recommendation X.509, "Information Technology -- Open
Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Authentication
Framework", COM 7-250-E Revision 1, 23 February 2001.
(Equivalent to ISO 9594-8.)
[X519] ---, Recommendation X.519, "Information Technology -- Open
Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Protocol
Specifications".
[X520] ---, Recommendation X.520, "Information Technology -- Open
Systems Interconnection -- The Directory: Selected Attribute
Types".
[X680] ---, Recommendation X.680, "Information Technology --
Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) -- Specification of
Basic Notation", 15 November 1994. (Equivalent to ISO/IEC
8824-1.)
Shirey Informational [Page 363]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
[X690] ---, Recommendation X.690, "Information Technology -- ASN.1
Encoding Rules -- Specification of Basic Encoding Rules
(BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished
Encoding Rules (DER)", 15 November 1994. (Equivalent to
ISO/IEC 8825-1.)
7. Acknowledgments
George Huff had a good idea! [Huff]
Author's Address
Dr. Robert W. Shirey
3516 N. Kensington St.
Arlington, Virginia 22207-1328
USA
EMail: rwshirey4949@verizon.net
Shirey Informational [Page 364]
RFC 4949 Internet Security Glossary, Version 2 August 2007
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78 and at www.rfc-editor.org/copyright.html, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Shirey Informational [Page 365]
一覧
スポンサーリンク
