<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
]>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-ietf-p2psip-share-09" ipr="trust200902">
  <?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt'?>

  <?rfc toc="yes"?>

  <?rfc symrefs="yes"?>

  <?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>

  <?rfc iprnotified="no" ?>

  <?rfc strict="yes" ?>

  <front>
    <title abbrev="ShaRe">A Usage for Shared Resources in RELOAD
    (ShaRe)</title>

    <author fullname="Alexander Knauf" initials="A." surname="Knauf">
      <organization abbrev="HAW Hamburg">HAW Hamburg</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Berliner Tor 7</street>

          <city>Hamburg</city>

          <code>D-20099</code>

          <country>Germany</country>
        </postal>

        <phone>+4940428758067</phone>

        <email>alexanderknauf@gmail.com</email>

        <uri></uri>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Thomas C. Schmidt" initials="T C."
            surname="Schmidt, Ed.">
      <organization abbrev="HAW Hamburg">HAW Hamburg</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Berliner Tor 7</street>

          <city>Hamburg</city>

          <code>D-20099</code>

          <country>Germany</country>
        </postal>

        <email>t.schmidt@haw-hamburg.de</email>

        <uri>http://inet.haw-hamburg.de/members/schmidt</uri>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Gabriel Hege" initials="G." surname="Hege">
      <organization abbrev="daviko GmbH">daviko GmbH</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Schillerstr. 107</street>

          <city>Berlin</city>

          <code>D-10625</code>

          <country>Germany</country>
        </postal>

        <phone>+493043004344</phone>

        <email>hege@daviko.com</email>

        <uri></uri>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Matthias Waehlisch" initials="M." surname="Waehlisch">
      <organization abbrev="link-lab &amp; FU Berlin">link-lab &amp; FU
      Berlin</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Hoenower Str. 35</street>

          <city>Berlin</city>

          <code>D-10318</code>

          <country>Germany</country>
        </postal>

        <email>mw@link-lab.net</email>

        <uri>http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl</uri>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date />

    <workgroup>P2PSIP Working Group</workgroup>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document defines a RELOAD Usage for managing shared write access
      to RELOAD Resources. Shared Resources in RELOAD (ShaRe) form a basic
      primitive for enabling various coordination and notification schemes
      among distributed peers. Access in ShaRe is controlled by a hierarchical
      trust delegation scheme maintained within an access list. A new
      USER-CHAIN-ACL access policy allows authorized peers to write a Shared
      Resource without owning its corresponding certificate. This
      specification also adds mechanisms to store Resources with a variable
      name which is useful whenever peer-independent rendezvous processes are
      required.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <t><xref target="RFC6940"></xref> defines the base protocol for REsource
      LOcation And Discovery (RELOAD) that allows for application-specific
      extensions by Usages. The present document defines such a RELOAD Usage
      for managing shared write access to RELOAD Resources and a mechanism to
      store Resources with a variable name. The Usage for Shared Resources in
      RELOAD (ShaRe) enables overlay users to share their exclusive write
      access to specific Resource/Kind pairs with others. Shared Resources
      form a basic primitive for enabling various coordination and
      notification schemes among distributed peers. Write permission is
      controlled by an Access Control List (ACL) Kind that maintains a chain
      of Authorized Peers for a particular Shared Resource. A newly defined
      USER-CHAIN-ACL access control policy enables shared write access in
      RELOAD.</t>

      <t>The Usage for Shared Resources in RELOAD is designed for jointly
      coordinated group applications among distributed peers (e.g., third
      party registration, see <xref target="I-D.ietf-p2psip-sip"></xref>, or
      distributed conferencing). Of particular interest are rendezvous
      processes, where a single identifier is linked to multiple, dynamic
      instances of a distributed cooperative service. Shared write access is
      based on a trust delegation mechanism. It transfers the authorization to
      write a specific Kind data by storing logical Access Control Lists. An
      ACL contains the ID of the Kind to be shared and contains trust
      delegations from one authorized to another (previously unauthorized)
      user.</t>

      <t>Shared write access augments the RELOAD security model, which is
      based on the restriction that peers are only allowed to write resources
      at a small set of well defined locations (Resource-IDs) in the overlay.
      Using the standard access control rules in RELOAD, these locations are
      bound to the username or Node-ID in the peer's certificate. This
      document extends the base policies to enable a controlled write access
      for multiple users to a common Resource-ID.</t>

      <t>Additionally, this specification defines an optional mechanism to
      store Resources with a variable Resource Name. It enables the storage of
      Resources whose name complies to a specific pattern. Definition of the
      pattern is arbitrary, but must contain the user name of the Resource
      creator.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Terminology">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
      document are to be interpreted as described in <xref target="RFC2119">
      </xref>.<vspace blankLines="1" /></t>

      <t>This document uses the terminology and definitions from the RELOAD
      base <xref target="RFC6940"> </xref> and <xref target="RFC7890"></xref>,
      in particular the RELOAD Usage, Resource and Kind. Additionally, the
      following terms are used: <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="Shared Resource:">The term Shared Resource in this
          document defines a RELOAD Resource with its associated Kinds, that
          can be written or overwritten by multiple RELOAD users following the
          specifications in this document.</t>

          <t hangText="Access Control List:">The term Access Control List in
          this document defines a logical list of RELOAD users allowed to
          write a specific RELOAD Resource/Kind pair by following the
          specifications in this document. The list items are stored as Access
          Control List Kinds that map trust delegations from user A to user B,
          where A is allowed to write a Shared Resource and the Access Control
          List, while B is a user that obtains write access to specified Kinds
          from A.</t>

          <t hangText="Resource Owner:">The term Resource Owner in this
          document defines a RELOAD peer that initially stored a Resource to
          be shared. The Resource Owner possesses the RELOAD certificate that
          grants write access to a specific Resource/Kind pair using the
          RELOAD certificate-based access control policies.</t>

          <t hangText="Authorized Peer:">The term Authorized Peer in this
          document defines a RELOAD peer that was granted write access to a
          Shared Resource by permission of the Resource Owner or another
          Authorized Peer.</t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="sec-srir" title="Shared Resources in RELOAD">
      <t>A RELOAD user that owns a certificate for writing at a specific
      overlay location can maintain one or more RELOAD Kinds that are
      designated for a non-exclusive write access shared with other RELOAD
      users. The mechanism to share those Resource/Kind pairs with a group of
      users consists of two basic steps. <list style="numbers">
          <t>Storage of the Resource/Kind pairs to be shared.</t>

          <t>Storage of an Access Control List (ACL) associated with those
          Kinds.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>ACLs are created by the Resource Owner and contain ACL items, each
      delegating the permission of writing the shared Kind to a specific user
      called Authorized Peer. For each shared Kind data, its Resource owner
      stores a root item that initiates an Access Control List. Trust
      delegation to the Authorized Peer can include the right to further
      delegate the write permission, enabling a tree of trust delegations with
      the Resource Owner as trust anchor at its root.</t>

      <t>The Resource/Kind pair to be shared can be any RELOAD Kind that
      complies to the following specifications: <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="Isolated Data Storage:">To prevent concurrent writing
          from race conditions, each data item stored within a Shared Resource
          SHALL be exclusively maintained by the RELOAD user who created it.
          Hence, Usages that allow the storage of Shared Resources are
          REQUIRED to use either the array or dictionary data model and apply
          additional mechanisms for isolating data as described in <xref
          target="subsec-mfisd"></xref>.</t>

          <t hangText="Access Control Policy:">To ensure write access to
          Shared Resource by Authorized Peers, each Usage MUST use the
          USER-CHAIN-ACL access policy as described in <xref
          target="subsec-aclacp"></xref>.</t>

          <t hangText="Resource Name Extension:">To enable Shared Resources to
          be stored using a variable resource name, this document defines an
          optional ResourceNameExtension structure. It contains the Resource
          Name of the Kind data to be stored and allows any receiver of a
          shared data to validate whether the Resource Name hashes to the
          Resource-ID. The ResourceNameExtension is made optional by
          configuration. The ResourceNameExtension field is only present in
          the Kind data structure when configured in the corresponding
          kind-block of the overlay configuration document (for more details
          see <xref target="subsec-ocde"></xref>). If the configuration allows
          variable resource names, a Kind using the USER-CHAIN-ACL policy MUST
          use the ResourceNameExtension as initial field within the Kind data
          structure definition. Otherwise the Kind data structure does not
          contain the ResourceNameExtension structure.</t>
        </list></t>

      <section anchor="subsec-mfisd"
               title="Mechanisms for Isolating Stored Data">
        <t>This section defines mechanisms to avoid race conditions while
        concurrently writing an array or dictionary of a Shared Resource.</t>

        <t>If a dictionary is used in the Shared Resource, the dictionary key
        MUST be the Node-ID of the certificate that will be used to sign the
        stored data. Thus data access is bound to the unique ID holder, and
        write concurrency does not occur.</t>

        <t>If the data model of the Shared Resource is an array, each
        Authorized Peer SHALL obtain its exclusive range of the array indices.
        The following algorithm will generate an array indexing scheme that
        avoids collisions. <list style="numbers">
            <t>Obtain the Node-ID of the certificate that will be used to sign
            the stored data</t>

            <t>Take the least significant 24 bits of that Node-ID to prefix
            the array index</t>

            <t>Append an 8 bit individual index value to those 24 bit of the
            Node-ID</t>
          </list>The resulting 32 bits long integer MUST be used as the index
        for storing an array entry in a Shared Resource. The 24 bits of the
        Node-ID serve as a collision-resistant identifier. The 8 bit
        individual index remain under the control of a single Peer and can be
        incremented individually for further array entries. In total, each
        Peer can generate 256 distinct entries for application-specific
        use.</t>

        <t>The mechanism to create the array index inherits
        collision-resistance from the overlay hash function in use (e.g.,
        SHA-1). It is designed to work reliably for small sizes of groups as
        applicable to resource sharing. In the rare event of a collision, the
        Storing Peer will refuse to (over-)write the requested array index and
        protect indexing integrity as defined in <xref
        target="subsec-gwa"></xref>. A Peer could rejoin the overlay with
        different Node-ID in such a case. </t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="sec-acd" title="Access Control List Definition">
      <section anchor="subsec-al" title="Overview">
        <t>An Access Control List (ACL) is a (self-managed) shared resource
        that contains a list of AccessControlListItem structures as defined in
        <xref target="subsec-ds"></xref>. Each entry delegates write access
        for a specific Kind data to a single RELOAD user. An ACL enables the
        RELOAD user who is authorized to write a specific Resource-ID to
        delegate his exclusive write access to a specific Kind to further
        users of the same RELOAD overlay. Each Access Control List data
        structure therefore carries the information about who obtains write
        access, the Kind-ID of the Resource to be shared, and whether
        delegation includes write access to the ACL itself. The latter
        condition grants the right to delegate write access further for the
        Authorized Peer. Access Control Lists are stored at the same overlay
        location as the Shared Resource and use the RELOAD array data model.
        They are initially created by the Resource Owner.</t>

        <t><xref target="fig-access-list"></xref> shows an example of an
        Access Control List. We omit the res_name_ext field to simplify
        illustration. The array entry at index 0x123abc01 displays the initial
        creation of an ACL for a Shared Resource of Kind-ID 1234 at the same
        Resource-ID. It represents the root item of the trust delegation tree
        for this shared RELOAD Kind. The root entry MUST contain the user name
        of the Resource owner in the "to_user" field and can only be written
        by the owner of the public key certificate associated with this
        Resource-ID. The allow_delegation (ad) flag for a root ACL item is set
        to 1 by default. The array index is generated by using the mechanism
        for isolating stored data as described in <xref
        target="subsec-mfisd"></xref>. Hence, the most significant 24 bits of
        the array index (0x123abc) are the least significant 24 bits of the
        Node-ID of the Resource Owner.</t>

        <t>The array item at index 0x123abc02 represents the first trust
        delegation to an Authorized Peer that is thus permitted to write to
        the Shared Resource of Kind-ID 1234. Additionally, the Authorized peer
        Alice is also granted write access to the ACL as indicated by the
        allow_delegation flag (ad) set to 1. This configuration authorizes
        Alice to store further trust delegations to the Shared Resource, i.e.,
        add items to the ACL. On the contrary, index 0x456def01 illustrates
        trust delegation for Kind-ID 1234, in which the Authorized Peer Bob is
        not allowed to grant access to further peers (ad = 0). Each Authorized
        Peer signs its ACL items by using its own signer identity along with
        its own private key. This allows other peers to validate the origin of
        an ACL item and makes ownership transparent.</t>

        <t>To manage Shared Resource access of multiple Kinds at a single
        location, the Resource Owner can create new ACL entries that refer to
        another Kind-ID as shown in array entry index 0x123abc03. Note that
        overwriting existing items in an Access Control List with a change in
        the Kind-ID revokes all trust delegations in the corresponding subtree
        (see <xref target="subsec-rwa"></xref>). Authorized Peers are only
        enabled to overwrite existing ACL item they own. The Resource Owner is
        allowed to overwrite any existing ACL item, but should be aware of its
        consequences on the trust delegation chain.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig-access-list" suppress-title="false"
                title="Simplified example of an Access Control List including entries for two different Kind-IDs and varying delegation (ad) configurations">
          <artwork align="center" xml:space="preserve"><![CDATA[
+------------------------------------------------------+
|                Access Control List                   |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
|  #Index   |       Array Entries          | signed by |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 123abc01  | to_user:Owner Kind:1234 ad:1 |   Owner   |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 123abc02  | to_user:Alice Kind:1234 ad:1 |   Owner   |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 123abc03  | to_user:Owner Kind:4321 ad:1 |   Owner   |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 123abc04  | to_user:Carol Kind:4321 ad:0 |   Owner   |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
|    ...    |           ...                |    ...    |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 456def01  | to_user:Bob   Kind:1234 ad:0 |   Alice   |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
|    ...    |           ...                |    ...    |
+-----------+------------------------------+-----------+
          ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Implementations of ShaRe should be aware that the trust delegation
        in an Access Control List need not be loop free. Self-contained
        circular trust delegation from A to B and B to A are syntactically
        possible, even though not very meaningful.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-ds" title="Data Structure">
        <t>The Kind data structure for the Access Control List is defined as
        follows:</t>

        <figure align="center" suppress-title="true">
          <artwork align="left" xml:space="preserve"><![CDATA[

struct {
     /* res_name_ext is optional, see documentation */                  
     ResourceNameExtension  res_name_ext;
     opaque                 to_user<0..2^16-1>;
     KindId                 kind;
     Boolean                allow_delegation;
} AccessControlListItem;
          ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>The AccessControlListItem structure is composed of: <list
            style="hanging">
            <t hangText="res_name_ext:">This optional field contains the
            Resource Name of a ResourceNameExtension (see <xref
            target="subsec-rnes"></xref>) to be used by a Shared Resource with
            variable resource name. This name serves the storing peer for
            validating, whether a variable resources name matches one of the
            predefined naming pattern from the configuration document for this
            Kind. The presence of this field is bound to a variable resource
            name element in the corresponding kind-block of the configuration
            document whose "enable" attribute is set to true (see <xref
            target="subsec-ocde"></xref>). Otherwise, if the "enable"
            attribute is false, the res_name_ext field SHALL NOT be present in
            the Kind data structure.</t>

            <t hangText="to_user:">This field contains the user name of the
            RELOAD peer that obtains write permission to the Shared
            Resource.</t>

            <t hangText="kind:">This field contains the Kind-ID of the Shared
            Resource.</t>

            <t hangText="allow_delegation:">If true, this Boolean flag
            indicates that the Authorized Peer in the 'to_user' field is
            allowed to add additional entries to the ACL for the specified
            Kind-ID.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="sec-vrne" title="Extension for Variable Resource Names">
      <section anchor="subsec-vrn-o" title="Overview">
        <t>In certain use cases, such as conferencing, it is desirable to
        increase the flexibility of a peer in using Resource Names beyond
        those defined by the user name or Node-ID fields in its certificate.
        For this purpose, this document presents the concept for variable
        Resources Names that enables providers of RELOAD instances to define
        relaxed naming schemes for overlay Resources.</t>

        <t>Each RELOAD node uses a certificate to identify itself using its
        user name (or Node-ID) while storing data under a specific Resource-ID
        (see Section 7.3 in <xref target="RFC6940"></xref>). The
        specifications in this document scheme adhere to this paradigm, but
        enable a RELOAD peer to store values of Resource Names that are
        derived from the user name in its certificate. This is done by using a
        Resource Name with a variable substring that still matches the user
        name in the certificate using a pattern defined in the overlay
        configuration document. Thus despite being variable, an allowable
        Resource Name remains tied to the Owner's certificate. A sample
        pattern might be formed as follows.</t>

        <figure align="center" suppress-title="true">
          <artwork align="left" xml:space="preserve"><![CDATA[ 
Example Pattern:
.*-conf-$USER@$DOMAIN
        ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>When defining the pattern, care must be taken to avoid conflicts
        arising from two user names of witch one is a substring of the other.
        In such cases, the holder of the shorter name could threaten to block
        the resources of the longer-named peer by choosing the variable part
        of a Resource Name to contain the entire longer user name. For
        example, a "*$USER" pattern would allow user EVE to define a resource
        with name "STEVE" and to block the resource name for user STEVE
        through this. This problem can easily be mitigated by delimiting the
        variable part of the pattern from the user name part by some fixed
        string, that by convention is not part of a user name (e.g., the
        "-conf-" in the above Example).</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-rnes" title="Data Structure">
        <t>This section defines the optional ResourceNameExtension structure
        for every Kind that uses the USER-CHAIN-ACL access control policy.</t>

        <figure align="center" suppress-title="true">
          <artwork align="left" xml:space="preserve"><![CDATA[
enum { pattern(1), (255)} ResourceNameType;

struct {
  ResourceNameType type; 
  uint16           length;

  select(type) {      
      case pattern:
        opaque     resource_name<0..2^16-1>;

      /* Types can be extended */
  };
} ResourceNameExtension;          
          ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>The content of the ResourceNameExtension consist of <list
            style="hanging">
            <t hangText="length:">This field contains the length of the
            remaining data structure. It is only used to allow for further
            extensions to this data structure.</t>
          </list> The content of the rest of the data structure depends of the
        ResourceNameType. Currently, the only defined type is "pattern".</t>

        <t>If the type is "pattern", then the following data structure
        contains an opaque &lt;0..2^16-1&gt; field containing the Resource
        Name of the Kind being stored. The type "pattern" further indicates
        that the Resource Name MUST match to one of the variable resource name
        pattern defined for this Kind in the configuration document.</t>

        <t>The ResourceNameType enum and the ResourceNameExtension structure
        can be extended by further Usages to define other naming schemes.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-ocde"
               title="Overlay Configuration Document Extension">
        <t>This section extends the overlay configuration document by defining
        new elements for patterns relating resource names to user names. It is
        noteworthy that additional constraints on the syntax and semantic of
        names can apply according to specific Usages. For example, Address of
        Record (AOR) syntax restrictions apply when using P2PSIP<xref
        target="I-D.ietf-p2psip-sip"> </xref>, while a more general naming is
        feasible in plain RELOAD.</t>

        <t>The &lt;variable-resource-names&gt; element serves as a container
        for one or multiple &lt;pattern&gt; sub-elements. It is an additional
        parameter within the kind-block and has a boolean "enable" attribute
        that indicates, if true, that the overlay provider allows variable
        resource names for this Kind. The default value of the "enable"
        attribute is "false". In the absence of a
        &lt;variable-resource-names&gt; element for a Kind using the
        USER-CHAIN-ACL access policy (see <xref
        target="subsec-aclacp"></xref>), implementors MUST assume this default
        value.</t>

        <t>A &lt;pattern&gt; element MUST be present if the "enabled"
        attribute of its parent element is set to true. Each &lt;pattern&gt;
        element defines a pattern for constructing extended resource names for
        a single Kind. It is of type xsd:string and interpreted as a regular
        expression according to "POSIX Extended Regular Expression" (see the
        specifications in <xref target="IEEE-Posix"></xref>). In this regular
        expression, $USER and $DOMAIN are used as variables for the
        corresponding parts of the string in the certificate user name field
        (with $USER preceding and $DOMAIN succeeding the '@'). Both variables
        MUST be present in any given pattern definition. Furthermore, variable
        parts in &lt;pattern&gt; elements defined in the overlay configuration
        document MUST remain syntactically separated from the user name part
        (e.g., by a dedicated delimiter) to prevent collisions with other
        names of other users. If no pattern is defined for a Kind, if the
        "enable" attribute is false, or if the regular expression does not
        meet the requirements specified in this section, the allowable
        Resource Names are restricted to the user name of the signer for
        Shared Resource.</t>

        <t>The Relax NG Grammar for the Variable Resource Names Extension
        reads:</t>

        <figure align="left" anchor="fig-le" suppress-title="true">
          <artwork align="left" xml:space="preserve"><![CDATA[
# VARIABLE RESOURCE URN SUB-NAMESPACE

namespace share = "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:p2p:config-base:share"

# VARIABLE RESOURCE NAMES ELEMENT 

kind-parameter &= element share:variable-resource-names {

    attribute enable { xsd:boolean },

    # PATTERN ELEMENT 

    element share:pattern { xsd:string }*
}?
          ]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="sec-actsr" title="Access Control to Shared Resources">
      <section anchor="subsec-gwa" title="Granting Write Access">
        <t>Write access to a Kind that is intended to be shared with other
        RELOAD users can solely be initiated by the Resource Owner. A Resource
        Owner can share RELOAD Kinds by using the following procedure. <list
            style="symbols">
            <t>The Resource Owner stores an ACL root item at the Resource-ID
            of the Shared Resource. The root item contains the resource name
            extension field (see <xref target="subsec-rnes"></xref>), the user
            name of the Resource Owner and Kind-ID of the Shared Resource. The
            allow_delegation flag is set to 1. The index of array data
            structure MUST be generated as described in <xref
            target="subsec-mfisd"></xref></t>

            <t>Further ACL items for this Kind-ID stored by the Resource Owner
            MAY delegate write access to Authorized Peers. These ACL items
            contain the same resource name extension field, the user name of
            the Authorized Peer and the Kind-Id of the Shared Resource.
            Optionally, the Resource Owner sets the "ad" to 1 (the default
            equals 0) to enable the Authorized Peer to further delegate write
            access. For each succeeding ACL item, the Resource Owner
            increments its individual index value by one (see <xref
            target="subsec-mfisd"></xref>) so that items can be stored in the
            numerical order of the array index starting with the index of the
            root item.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>An Authorized Peer with delegation allowance ("ad"=1) can extend
        the access to an existing Shared Resource as follows.<list
            style="symbols">
            <t>An Authorized Peer can store additional ACL items at the
            Resource-ID of the Shared Resource. These ACL items contain the
            resource name extension field, the user name of the newly
            Authorized Peer, and the Kind-Id of the Shared Resource.
            Optionally, the "ad" flag is set to 1 for allowing the newly
            Authorized Peer to further delegate write access. The array index
            MUST be generated as described in <xref
            target="subsec-mfisd"></xref>. Each succeeding ACL item can be
            stored in the numerical order of the array index.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>A store request by an Authorized Peer that attempts to overwrite
        any ACL item signed by another Peer is unauthorized and causes an
        Error_Forbidden response from the Storing Peer. Such access conflicts
        could be caused by an array index collision. However, the probability
        of a collision of two or more identical array indices will be
        negligibly low using the mechanism for isolating stored data (see
        <xref target="subsec-mfisd"></xref>)</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-rwa" title="Revoking Write Access">
        <t>Write permissions are revoked by storing a non-existent value
        (see<xref target="RFC6940"></xref> Section 7.2.1) at the corresponding
        item of the Access Control List. Revoking a permission automatically
        invalidates all delegations performed by that user including all
        subsequent delegations. This allows the invalidation of entire
        subtrees of the delegations tree with only a single operation.
        Overwriting the root item with a non-existent value of an Access List
        invalidates the entire delegations tree.</t>

        <t>An existing ACL item MUST only be overwritten by the user who
        initially stored the corresponding entry, or by the Resource Owner
        that is allowed to overwrite all ACL items for revoking write
        access.</t>

        <t>To protect the privacy of the users, the Resource Owner SHOULD
        overwrite all subtrees that have been invalidated.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-vasr"
               title="Validating Write Access through an ACL">
        <t>Access Control Lists are used to transparently validate
        authorization of peers for writing a data value at a Shared Resource.
        Thereby it is assumed that the validating peer is in possession of the
        complete and most recent ACL for a specific Resource/Kind pair. The
        corresponding procedure consists of recursively traversing the trust
        delegation tree with strings compared as binary objects. It proceeds
        as follows. <list style="numbers">
            <t>Obtain the user name of the certificate used for signing the
            data stored at the Shared Resource.</t>

            <t>Validate that an item of the corresponding ACL (i.e., for this
            Resource/Kind pair) contains a "to_user" field whose value equals
            the user name obtained in step 1. If the Shared Resource under
            examination is an Access Control List Kind, further validate if
            the "ad" flag is set to 1.</t>

            <t>Select the user name of the certificate that was used to sign
            the ACL item obtained in step 2.</t>

            <t>Validate that an item of the corresponding ACL contains a
            "to_user" field whose value equals the user name obtained in step
            3. Additionally validate that the "ad" flag is set to 1.</t>

            <t>Repeat steps 3 and 4 until the "to_user" value is equal to the
            user name of the signer of the previously selected ACL item. This
            final ACL item is expected to be the root item of this ACL which
            MUST be further validated by verifying that the root item was
            signed by the owner of the ACL Resource.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>The trust delegation chain is valid if and only if all verification
        steps succeed. In this case, the creator of the data value of the
        Shared Resource is an Authorized Peer.</t>

        <t>Note that the ACL validation procedure can be omitted whenever the
        creator of data at a Shared Resource is the Resource Owner itself. The
        latter can be verified by its public key certificate as defined in
        <xref target="subsec-aclacp"></xref>.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-oosp" title="Operations of Storing Peers">
        <t>Storing peers at which Shared Resource and ACL are physically
        stored, are responsible for controlling storage attempts to a Shared
        Resource and its corresponding Access Control List. To assert the
        USER-CHAIN-ACL access policy (see <xref
        target="subsec-aclacp"></xref>), a storing peer MUST perform the
        access validation procedure described in <xref
        target="subsec-vasr"></xref> on any incoming store request using the
        most recent Access Control List for every Kind that uses the
        USER-CHAIN-ACL policy. It SHALL further ensure that only the Resource
        Owner stores new ACL root items for Shared Resources.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="ooap" title="Operations of Accessing Peers">
        <t>Accessing peers, i.e., peers that fetch a Shared Resource, MAY
        validate that the originator of a Shared Resource was authorized to
        store data at this Resource-ID by processing the corresponding ACL. To
        enable an accessing peer to perform the access validation procedure
        described in <xref target="subsec-vasr"></xref>, it first needs to
        obtain the most recent Access Control List in the following way. <list
            style="numbers">
            <t>Send a Stat request to the Resource-ID of the Shared Resource
            to obtain all array indexes of stored ACL Kinds (as per <xref
            target="RFC6940"></xref>, Section 7.4.3.)</t>

            <t>Fetch all indexes of existing ACL items at this Resource-ID by
            using the array ranges retrieved in the Stat request answer</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Peers can cache previously fetched Access Control Lists up to the
        maximum lifetime of an individual item. Since stored values could have
        been modified or invalidated prior to their expiration, an accessing
        peer SHOULD use a Stat request to check for updates prior to using the
        data cache.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="subsec-aclacp" title="USER-CHAIN-ACL Access Policy">
        <t>This document specifies an additional access control policy to the
        RELOAD base document <xref target="RFC6940"></xref>. The
        USER-CHAIN-ACL policy allows Authorized Peers to write a Shared
        Resource, even though they do not own the corresponding certificate.
        Additionally, the USER-CHAIN-ACL allows the storage of Kinds with a
        variable resource name that are following one of the specified naming
        pattern. Hence, on an inbound store request on a Kind that uses the
        USER-CHAIN-ACL access policy, the following rules MUST be applied:</t>

        <t>In the USER-CHAIN-ACL policy, a given value MUST be written or
        overwritten, if either one of USER-MATCH or USER-NODE-MATCH (mandatory
        if the data model is dictionary) access policies of the base document
        <xref target="RFC6940"></xref> applies.</t>

        <t>Otherwise, the value MUST be written if the certificate of the
        signer contains a user name that matches to the user and domain
        portion in one of the variable resource name patterns (c.f. <xref
        target="sec-vrne"></xref>) specified in the configuration document
        and, additionally, the hashed Resource Name matches the Resource-ID.
        The Resource Name of the Kind to be stored MUST be taken from the
        mandatory ResourceNameExtension field in the corresponding Kind data
        structure.</t>

        <t>Otherwise, the value MUST be written if the ACL validation
        procedure described in <xref target="subsec-vasr"></xref> has been
        successfully applied.</t>

        <t>Otherwise, the store request MUST be denied.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="sec-akd" title="ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST Kind Definition">
      <t>This section defines the ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST Kind previously
      described in this document. <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="Name:">ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST</t>

          <t hangText="Kind IDs:">The Resource Name for ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST
          Kind-ID is the Resource Name of the Kind that will be shared by
          using the ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST Kind.</t>

          <t hangText="Data Model:">The data model for the ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST
          Kind-ID is array. The array indexes are formed by using the
          mechanism for isolated stored data as described in <xref
          target="subsec-mfisd"></xref></t>

          <t hangText="Access Control:">USER-CHAIN-ACL (see <xref
          target="subsec-aclacp"></xref>)</t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>In this section we discuss security issues that are relevant to the
      usage of shared resources in RELOAD <xref target="RFC6940"></xref>.</t>

      <section title="Resource Exhaustion">
        <t>Joining a RELOAD overlay inherently poses a certain resource load
        on a peer, because it has to store and forward data for other peers.
        In common RELOAD semantics, each Resource-ID and thus position in the
        overlay may only be written by a limited set of peers - often even
        only a single peer, which limits this burden. In the case of Shared
        Resources, a single resource may be written by multiple peers, who may
        even write an arbitrary number of entries (e.g., delegations in the
        ACL). This leads to an enhanced use of resources at individual overlay
        nodes. The problem of resource exhaustion can easily be mitigated for
        Usages based on the ShaRe-Usage by imposing restrictions on size,
        i.e., &lt;max-size&gt; element for a certain Kind in the configuration
        document.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Malicious or Misbehaving Storing Peer">
        <t>The RELOAD overlay is designed to operate despite the presence of a
        small set of misbehaving peers. This is not different for Shared
        Resources since a small set of malicious peers does not disrupt the
        functionality of the overlay in general, but may have implications for
        the peers needing to store or access information at the specific
        locations in the ID space controlled by a malicious peer. A storing
        peer could withhold stored data which results in a denial of service
        to the group using the specific resource. But it could not return
        forged data, since the validity of any stored data can be
        independently verified using the attached signatures.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Trust Delegation to a Malicious or Misbehaving Peer">
        <t>A Resource Owner that erroneously delegated write access to a
        Shared Resource for a misbehaving peer enables this malicious member
        of the overlay to interfere with the corresponding group application
        in several unwanted ways. Examples of destructive interferences range
        from exhausting shared storage to dedicated application-specific
        misuse. Additionally, a bogus peer that was granted delegation rights
        may authorize further malicious collaborators to writing the Shared
        Resource.</t>

        <t>It is the obligation of the Resource Owner to bind trust delegation
        to apparent trustworthiness. Additional measures to monitor proper
        behavior may be applied. In any case, the Resource Owner will be able
        to revoke trust delegation of an entire tree in a single overwrite
        operation. It further holds the right to overwrite any malicious
        contributions to the shared resource under misuse.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Privacy Issues">
        <t>All data stored in the Shared Resource is readable by any node in
        the overlay, thus applications requiring privacy need to encrypt the
        data. The ACL needs to be stored unencrypted, thus the list members of
        a group using a Shared Resource will always be publicly visible.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="IANA Considerations">
      <section title="Access Control Policy">
        <t>IANA shall register the following entry in the "RELOAD Access
        Control Policies" Registry (cf., <xref target="RFC6940"></xref>) to
        represent the USER-CHAIN-ACL Access Control Policy, as described in
        <xref target="subsec-aclacp"></xref>. [NOTE TO IANA/RFC-EDITOR: Please
        replace RFC-AAAA with the RFC number for this specification in the
        following list.]</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[ 
+-------------------+----------+
| Kind              |      RFC |
+-------------------+----------+
| USER-CHAIN-ACL    | RFC-AAAA |
+-------------------+----------+
	]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>

      <section title="Data Kind-ID">
        <t>IANA shall register the following code point in the "RELOAD Data
        Kind-ID" Registry (cf., <xref target="RFC6940"></xref>) to represent
        the ShaRe ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST kind, as described in <xref
        target="sec-akd"></xref>. [NOTE TO IANA/RFC-EDITOR: Please replace
        RFC-AAAA with the RFC number for this specification in the following
        list.]</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[ 
+----------------------+------------+----------+
| Kind                 |    Kind-ID |      RFC |
+----------------------+------------+----------+
| ACCESS-CONTROL-LIST  |        TBD | RFC-AAAA |
+----------------------+------------+----------+
	]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>

      <section title="XML Name Space Registration">
        <t>This document registers the following URI for the config XML name
        space in the IETF XML registry defined in <xref
        target="RFC3688"></xref></t>

        <t><list style="hanging">
            <t
            hangText="URI:">urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:p2p:config-base:share</t>

            <t hangText="Registrant Contact:">The IESG</t>

            <t hangText="XML:">N/A, the requested URI is an XML name space</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6940"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.3688"?>

      <reference anchor="IEEE-Posix">
        <front>
          <title>IEEE Standard for Information Technology - Portable Operating
          System Interface (POSIX) - Part 2: Shell and Utilities (Vol.
          1)</title>

          <author fullname="The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers"></author>

          <date month="January" year="1993" />
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="IEEE Std" value="1003.2-1992, ISBN 1-55937-255-9" />
      </reference>
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7890"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-p2psip-sip"?>

    </references>

    <section numbered="no" title="Acknowledgments">
      <t>This work was stimulated by fruitful discussions in the P2PSIP
      working group and the SAM research group. We would like to thank all
      active members for constructive thoughts and feedback. In particular,
      the authors would like to thank (in alphabetical order) Emmanuel
      Baccelli, Alissa Cooper, Lothar Grimm, Russ Housley, Cullen Jennings,
      Peter Musgrave, Joerg Ott, Marc Petit-Huguenin, Peter Pogrzeba, and Jan
      Seedorf. This work was partly funded by the German Federal Ministry of
      Education and Research, projects HAMcast, Mindstone, and SAFEST.</t>
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>
