|
| 1 | +# Coldwire Protocol Specification |
| 2 | +Version: **`1.0`** |
| 3 | + |
| 4 | +Date: **`2025-09-09`** |
| 5 | + |
| 6 | +Author(s): **`ChadSec1`** (**`Freedom Club Sec`**) |
| 7 | + |
| 8 | +Contact: github.com/Freedom-Club-Sec |
| 9 | + |
| 10 | +Status: **`Draft`** |
| 11 | + |
| 12 | +Intended Audience: Security engineers, cryptographers, protocol implementers |
| 13 | + |
| 14 | +### 0. Overview |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +The *`Coldwire`* Protocol is a federated, metadata-resistant, censorship-resistant chat protocol, built on top of HTTP protocol. The purpose of the protocol is to simply relay messages between users and or other servers running *Coldwire*, in a way that does not include any metadata except "ciphertext in", "ciphertext out", and a random "mailbox" user identifier |
| 17 | + |
| 18 | +*`Coldwire`* protocol is designed to evade censorship, and usage detection, by network adversaries (LAN Router-controlling adversaries, ISP adversaries, etc) by blending in with regular browser traffic. It's also designed so that a malicious server, cannot replay nor tamper with requests, and cannot learn any metadata beyond the sender and receiver `User-IDs`. |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +The protocol incorporates the `Strandlock` protocol, which is an end-to-end encrypted protocol. It handles confidentity, integrity, and authenticity in a user-to-user manner, making our protocol simple because we do not have to implement replay nor tampering protection ourselves, it is handled by the users. |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | +### 1. Terminology |
| 23 | + |
| 24 | +For clarity, the following terms are used consistently throughout this specification: |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +#### Request (`message`, `ciphertext`) |
| 27 | +A generic protocol message sent from one party to another, via sending it to a Coldwire server to relay it. |
| 28 | + |
| 29 | +#### Response (`message`, `ciphertext`) |
| 30 | +The reply to a Request, carrying the necessary protocol data to complete or continue a Strandlock operation. |
| 31 | +We use term "Response" and "Request" interchangably. A response is a request that's given to a party by `Coldwire` server. |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +#### User-ID (`identifier`) |
| 34 | +A long-term, randomly generated identifier which consists of a 16 digits string. It is generated on the server when a user first "registers" on a `Coldwire` server. |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +#### User federation ID (`federation identifier`) |
| 37 | +A `user-ID` with the URL of the `Coldwire` server appended at the end of it, separated by a `@` (i.e. `[email protected]`). |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | +#### User Public-Key (`signing public-key`) |
| 40 | +A `ML-DSA-87` public-key, saved on the `Coldwire` server, tied to a specific `User-ID` |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +#### User Private-Key (`signing private key`, `signing key`) |
| 43 | +A `ML-DSA-87` private-key, private key is stored on the user's device locally, and the public-key is stored on the `Coldwire` server as the `signing public-key`. |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +#### Client Implementation |
| 46 | +Refers to a user-client implementation of the `Coldwire protocol`. |
| 47 | + |
| 48 | +#### Server implementation |
| 49 | +Refers to a server implementation of the `Coldwire protocol`. |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | +### 2. HTTP Requests |
| 53 | +#### 2.1. Client Headers |
| 54 | +`Coldwire` client implementations *must* mimick mainstream, popular browsers headers. |
| 55 | + |
| 56 | +All `Coldwire` client implementations *must* adhere to the following requirements for `HTTP` requests: |
| 57 | +- *All* `HTTP` field headers name **must** be lower-case, for compatiability with `HTTP/2` servers. |
| 58 | +The HTTP specification requires it, needed incase a Coldwire server implementation is behind another server. |
| 59 | + |
| 60 | +- *All* header fields must be sent in the same exact order that the browser in question orders them. |
| 61 | +Helps against network requests fingerprinting. |
| 62 | +- Implementations **must** randomly pick a single browser and mimic its headers, and use them for the duration of the session |
| 63 | +If you rotate header sets between different requests, that creates a unique fingerprint to network adversaries, so avoid. |
| 64 | + |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | + |
| 67 | +#### 2.2. Federated servers headers |
| 68 | +`Coldwire` server implementations *must* adhere to the following requirements for `HTTP` requests: |
| 69 | +- You **must not** include any headers that may indicate to a server you're intending to receive compressed (gzip, etc) response! |
| 70 | + |
| 71 | +- *All* `HTTP` field headers name **must** be lower-case, for compatiability with `HTTP/2` servers. |
| 72 | +The HTTP specification requires it, needed incase a Coldwire server implementation is behind another server. |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | + |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | +### 3. Authentication |
| 77 | +In `Coldwire` there is no concept of `registration` or `login`, instead, a user generates their `ML-DSA-87` keypair, sends the `public_key` to server, then authenticates by signing the given challenge. |
| 78 | + |
| 79 | +The request payload **must** be in `JSON`, and the response will also be in `JSON`. |
| 80 | +**note** that `JSON` requests and responses only applies for the *authentication API* endpoints. |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | +#### 3.1. Authentication Initialization (`Alice`) |
| 83 | +`Alice` sends an HTTP `POST` request to the endpoint running `Coldwire` |
| 84 | +``` |
| 85 | +URL: example.com/authenticate/init |
| 86 | +``` |
| 87 | + |
| 88 | +**If** its `Alice's` first time authenticating to the server, she must not bundle a `user_id` field, only a *base64-encoded* `public_key` field, `JSON` payload: |
| 89 | +```json |
| 90 | +{ |
| 91 | + "public_key": "base64_encoded_public_key" |
| 92 | +} |
| 93 | +``` |
| 94 | + |
| 95 | + |
| 96 | +**If** `Alice` authenticated at least once before, she **must not** bundle a `public_key` field, only a `user_id` field: |
| 97 | +```json |
| 98 | +{ |
| 99 | + "user_id": "1234567890123456" |
| 100 | +} |
| 101 | +``` |
| 102 | + |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | +Server responds with a `JSON` response containing a `challenge`, which is a random `64-byte` *base64-encoded* string: |
| 105 | +```json |
| 106 | +{ |
| 107 | + "challenge": "base64_encoded_challenge" |
| 108 | +} |
| 109 | +``` |
| 110 | + |
| 111 | +#### 3.2. Authentication Verification (`Alice`) |
| 112 | + |
| 113 | +`Alice` must decode the `challenge` given to her in `2.1. Initialization` step, and sign it with her `ML-DSA-87` private key, and *base64-encode* the signature, and send it to the server, alongside the challenge string: |
| 114 | + |
| 115 | +```json |
| 116 | +{ |
| 117 | + "signature": "base64_encoded_signature", |
| 118 | + "challenge": "base64_encoded_challenge" |
| 119 | +} |
| 120 | +``` |
| 121 | + |
| 122 | + |
| 123 | +After that is done, the server returns a `JSON` response with the `JWT token`, and his user's `User-ID` inside: |
| 124 | +```json |
| 125 | +{ |
| 126 | + "user_id": "1234567890123456", |
| 127 | + "token": "User's JWT Token" |
| 128 | +} |
| 129 | +``` |
| 130 | + |
| 131 | +There is no expiration timestamp in the `JWT token`, the user simply keeps using the same `JWT token` token indefientely, until a server operator decides to rotate their `JWT` secret. |
| 132 | + |
| 133 | +Even though there are no expiration timestamp, client implementations must always authenticate on application startup. |
| 134 | + |
| 135 | +#### 3.3. Authentication Notes |
| 136 | +The reason we do include an expiration timestamp in the `JWT token` is to help reduce metadata emitting from both server, and client. |
| 137 | + |
| 138 | +*Coldwire* server operators are recommended to rotate their `JWT secret` every month for cryptographic hyiegene, if you can rotate it more frequently, that is acceptable. The protocol does not enforce any `JWT secret` rotations. |
| 139 | + |
| 140 | +Additionally, even if a user's `JWT token` is compromised, no catastrophic security issues arise, except potential denial-of-service risks for the user. |
| 141 | +Old messages cannot be retrieved and new messages cannot be read, contact list cannot be recovered, etc. |
| 142 | +New contacts can't be verified because the attacker wouldn't know a contact's `SMP` answer, only the real user does. |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | + |
| 145 | +If a server `JWT secret` is compromised, no catastrophic security issues arise, except potential denial-of-service risks for the server and its users. |
| 146 | + |
| 147 | +The reason old and new messages cannot be read, is because we utilize the `Strandlock protocol` for true end-to-end encryption. |
| 148 | + |
| 149 | +Messages are not just computationally safe, but in some scenarios, the message become uncrackable even with infinite computing power (to an adversary who only has access to a message's ciphertext, and not KEM's ciphertext, in which case OTP security inherits the algorithms in question security properties). |
| 150 | + |
| 151 | +In real world, both a server's `JWT secret` and a user's `JWT token` are highly unlikely to be leaked, unless an endpoint compromise occurs. |
| 152 | + |
| 153 | +`JWT secrets` are highly recommended to be (at least) `128 bytes`. But there are no protocol enforcements regarding this, you can make it as long as you wish. |
| 154 | + |
| 155 | +### 4. Data |
| 156 | +`Coldwire`, when `Alice` talks to `Bob`, all the server(s) sees is `Alice's` & `Bob's` `User-ID`, and a ciphertext `blob`. |
| 157 | + |
| 158 | +All requests sent are `HTTP Forms`, with `metadata` as a `Form Field`, and `blob` as a `File Upload`. |
| 159 | + |
| 160 | +All requests sent must bundle an "authorization" header, containing the user's `JWT token`. |
| 161 | + |
| 162 | +#### 4.1. Sending Data (`Alice` -> `Server`) |
| 163 | +`Alice` sends data to `Bob` by sending a `POST` request to the `Coldwire` server: |
| 164 | +```json |
| 165 | +URL: example.com/data/send |
| 166 | +``` |
| 167 | +With `Form` payload: |
| 168 | +```json |
| 169 | +metadata: { |
| 170 | + "recipient": "Bobs User_ID" |
| 171 | +} |
| 172 | +``` |
| 173 | +and bundled within the same request, is a `File Upload` with name `blob`, containing raw bytes (ciphertext, etc) |
| 174 | + |
| 175 | +#### 4.2. Data processor (`Server`) |
| 176 | +`Coldwire` server receives data request, verifies the `Alice's` `JWT token`, and checks if the `recipient` is all digits: |
| 177 | +if not, checks if `recipient` format is correct (i.e. " [email protected]") and sends a request to the target `Coldwire` server. |
| 178 | + |
| 179 | +If `recipient` is all digits, the server checks if they exist in the local database, if not, they return a 400 error. |
| 180 | +If they exist, the `Coldwire` server then processes the `blob`, rejecting it if it's empty. |
| 181 | + |
| 182 | +If the sender or `recipient` contain a "@", request is rejected. |
| 183 | + |
| 184 | +The `Coldwire` server then process the request by constructing a payload which consists of: |
| 185 | +``` |
| 186 | +payload = user_id_utf_8 + \x0 + blob |
| 187 | +``` |
| 188 | +Then the length of the `payload` is calculated, and a `length` prefix of size `3 bytes` in `big-endian` format is inserted at the start of the payload: |
| 189 | +``` |
| 190 | +payload = length_prefix + payload |
| 191 | +``` |
| 192 | + |
| 193 | +And the data is saved to the `recipient` inbox (any saving medium, can be Redis, SQL database, etc). |
| 194 | + |
| 195 | +#### 4.3. Receiving Data (`Bob` <- `Server`) |
| 196 | +`Bob` sends a `GET` request that longpolls the `Coldwire` endpoint: |
| 197 | +``` |
| 198 | +URL: example.com/data/longpoll |
| 199 | +``` |
| 200 | + |
| 201 | +The `Coldewire` server sends a response of either empty bytes, or many `message_payloads` continunesly concatenated together. |
| 202 | +After `Coldwire` server sends a response to `Bob`, it deletes all the previously saved data payloads queue. |
| 203 | + |
| 204 | +`Bob` client parses the response, by using the `length_prefix` at start of each message, `Bob` can separate each message. |
| 205 | +`Bob` then further parses it, by separating a message sender, from the blob, by splitting on the first NULL byte (`\0`) |
| 206 | +`Bob` client verifies the format of the `sender` identifier is correct, simply dismissing message if not. |
| 207 | +`Bob` then processes the `blob` using the `Strandlock protocol` |
| 208 | + |
| 209 | + |
| 210 | +#### 4.4. Notes |
| 211 | +Replay protection, tampering protection, authentication, MiTM protection, etc, are all handled by the `Strandlock protocol`. |
| 212 | + |
| 213 | +The reason we send request in `Form` and `File Uploads`, and receive back response as `raw bytes`, is to save bandwidth. The `Strandlock protocol` can be quite heavy (some ciphertext reaching MBs in size). |
| 214 | + |
| 215 | + |
| 216 | + |
| 217 | + |
| 218 | + |
0 commit comments