Skip to content

CBOM: add protocol registry schema - #1010

Draft
bhess wants to merge 3 commits into
CycloneDX:2.0-devfrom
bhess:bhe-protocol-registry
Draft

CBOM: add protocol registry schema#1010
bhess wants to merge 3 commits into
CycloneDX:2.0-devfrom
bhess:bhe-protocol-registry

Conversation

@bhess

@bhess bhess commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

This adds a protocol registry to cryptography-defs, alongside the existing algorithm families and elliptic curves. Protocols are defined per family and version, each with its algorithm composition, so tools can answer questions like "can this protocol version negotiate a post-quantum key exchange?" without every CBOM re-describing the protocol.

The TLS 1.3 entry is illustrative for now; the list will be populated further (TLS 1.2, SSH, IKEv2, ...).

What's added

A new top-level protocols array. Each protocol version carries a composition: a list of functional slots that all apply together.

  • role: what the slot does (key-exchange, signature, ...); open string with examples, like variant.primitive.
  • selection: how many algorithms of the set are used at runtime: all-of, any-of, or one-of.
  • selectedBy: how that choice is made: negotiation, configuration, server-selected, ...
  • algorithmSet: algorithm names matching the variant patterns of the algorithm registry, or named bundles {name, algorithms[]} for cipher suites and hybrid key exchange groups.

Example, TLS 1.3 key exchange:

{
  "role": "key-exchange",
  "selection": "one-of",
  "selectedBy": "negotiation",
  "algorithmSet": [
    "x25519",
    { "name": "X25519MLKEM768", "algorithms": ["x25519", "ML-KEM-768"] }
  ]
}

Backwards compatibility

No breaking changes, protocols is optional. protocolFamiliesEnum uses the same tokens as protocolProperties.type, so a BOM references a registry entry via protocolProperties.type plus version.. no new field in the core schema needed.

Defines protocols by family and version, alongside the existing
algorithm families and elliptic curves. Each version carries a
composition: a list of functional slots that all apply. A slot holds
an algorithm set; "selection" states whether all, one or more, or
exactly one of the set are used at runtime, and "selectedBy" how that
choice is made (negotiation, configuration, ...). Set members are
algorithm names that resolve against the variant patterns of the
algorithm registry, or named bundles of such names (cipher suites,
hybrid key exchange groups).

The TLS 1.3 entry is illustrative for now; the list will be populated
further.

Signed-off-by: Basil Hess <bhe@zurich.ibm.com>
@bhess
bhess requested a review from a team as a code owner August 7, 2026 13:33
@bhess bhess added the cap: cryptography Capability: Cryptography (CBOM) label Aug 13, 2026
@stevespringett
stevespringett marked this pull request as draft August 13, 2026 13:43

@Mehrn0ush Mehrn0ush left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi,
The composition model and TLS 1.3 example make sense to me. I left a few inline questions on join semantics, pattern resolution, and selectedBy; all minor while this is draft.
One more thing I didn’t inline is: the registry looks like “what a protocol version can negotiate,” while existing protocolProperties.cipherSuites / IKEv2 fields describe this instance. A short note on that layering (and how registry names relate to IANA-style identifiers in CBOMs) would make the split clearer for implementers.

"description": "Defines a specific protocol version and its algorithm composition.",
"additionalProperties": false,
"properties": {
"version": {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How should tools join this to a BOM? Is the lookup an exact match on protocolProperties.type + protocolProperties.version → family + this version string (e.g. "1.3" only)? Worth documenting, since there’s no schema $ref or uniqueness constraint on the pair.

"algorithmSet"
]
},
"algorithmSet": {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pattern matching isn’t enforced by JSON Schema here — only plain strings. right? For PQ-readiness queries, should there be a short resolution rule (or CI check) so bad names don’t silently fail lookup?

"description": "The set of algorithms that can fill this slot."
}
},
"required": [

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

selectedBy is in the PR description and all TLS examples, but it’s not required here. Intentional, or should it be required when selection is one-of / any-of?

bhess added 2 commits August 20, 2026 14:03
A member of an algorithm set can now reference another protocol by
family and optionally version, so composite protocols can be expressed:
IPsec selects IKEv1 or IKEv2 for key management and uses ESP or AH for
packet protection. The reference is depth one; the composition of the
referenced protocol is given by its own registry entry, which may again
reference sub-protocols.

Adds the esp and ah protocol families, an ipsec entry, and an IKEv2
entry whose slots carry the IKEv2 transform types (encryption, prf,
integrity, key exchange), including ML-KEM-768 as an additional key
exchange per RFC 9370.

Signed-off-by: Basil Hess <bhe@zurich.ibm.com>
The protocol type in the cryptography model now references
protocolFamiliesEnum from cryptography-defs, the same way
algorithmFamily and ellipticCurve do. The family descriptions move to
meta:enum on the registry enum, so the registry is the single source
of the protocol vocabulary, and new families (esp, ah) become valid
protocol types automatically. The other and unknown values are
dropped; as with algorithmFamily, an unknown protocol type is
expressed by omitting the field.

Signed-off-by: Basil Hess <bhe@zurich.ibm.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cap: cryptography Capability: Cryptography (CBOM) proposed core enhancement

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants