STUN Test Vectors: Test Vectors for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)
Reference data for testing STUN implementations.
Denis-Courmont, R., "Test Vectors for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5769, DOI 10.17487/RFC5769, April 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5769>.
@misc{rfc5769,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 5769,
howpublished = {RFC 5769},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC5769},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5769},
author = {R. Denis-Courmont},
title = {{Test Vectors for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)}},
pagetotal = 11,
year = 2010,
month = apr,
} RFC text
Contents
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Denis-Courmont
Request for Comments: 5769 Nokia
Category: Informational April 2010
ISSN: 2070-1721
Test Vectors for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)
Abstract
The Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) protocol defines
several STUN attributes. The content of some of these --
FINGERPRINT, MESSAGE-INTEGRITY, and XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS -- involve
binary-logical operations (hashing, xor). This document provides
test vectors for those attributes.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5769.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Test Vectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Sample Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Sample IPv4 Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Sample IPv6 Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4. Sample Request with Long-Term Authentication . . . . . . . 8
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix A. Source Code for Test Vectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
The Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)[RFC5389] protocol
defines two different hashes that may be included in messages
exchanged by peers implementing that protocol:
FINGERPRINT attribute: a 32-bit Cyclic Redundancy Check.
MESSAGE-INTEGRITY attribute: an HMAC-SHA1 [RFC2104] authentication
code.
This document provides samples of properly formatted STUN messages
including these hashes, for the sake of testing implementations of
the STUN protocol.
2. Test Vectors
All included vectors are represented as a series of hexadecimal
values in network byte order. Each pair of hexadecimal digits
represents one byte.
Messages follow the Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE)
Connectivity Checks use case of STUN (see [RFC5245]). These messages
include FINGERPRINT, MESSAGE-INTEGRITY, and XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS STUN
attributes. These attributes are considered to be most prone to
implementation errors. An additional message is provided to test
STUN authentication with long-term credentials (which is not used by
ICE).
In the following sample messages, two types of plain UTF-8 text
attributes are included. The values of certain of these attributes
were purposely sized to require padding. Non-ASCII characters are
represented as <U+xxxx> where xxxx is the hexadecimal number of their
Unicode code point.
In this document, ASCII white spaces (U+0020) are used for padding
within the first three messages - this is arbitrary. Similarly, the
last message uses nul bytes for padding. As per [RFC5389], padding
bytes may take any value.
2.1. Sample Request
This request uses the following parameters:
Software name: "STUN test client" (without quotes)
Username: "evtj:h6vY" (without quotes)
Password: "VOkJxbRl1RmTxUk/WvJxBt" (without quotes)
00 01 00 58 Request type and message length
21 12 a4 42 Magic cookie
b7 e7 a7 01 }
bc 34 d6 86 } Transaction ID
fa 87 df ae }
80 22 00 10 SOFTWARE attribute header
53 54 55 4e }
20 74 65 73 } User-agent...
74 20 63 6c } ...name
69 65 6e 74 }
00 24 00 04 PRIORITY attribute header
6e 00 01 ff ICE priority value
80 29 00 08 ICE-CONTROLLED attribute header
93 2f f9 b1 } Pseudo-random tie breaker...
51 26 3b 36 } ...for ICE control
00 06 00 09 USERNAME attribute header
65 76 74 6a }
3a 68 36 76 } Username (9 bytes) and padding (3 bytes)
59 20 20 20 }
00 08 00 14 MESSAGE-INTEGRITY attribute header
9a ea a7 0c }
bf d8 cb 56 }
78 1e f2 b5 } HMAC-SHA1 fingerprint
b2 d3 f2 49 }
c1 b5 71 a2 }
80 28 00 04 FINGERPRINT attribute header
e5 7a 3b cf CRC32 fingerprint
2.2. Sample IPv4 Response
This response uses the following parameter:
Password: "VOkJxbRl1RmTxUk/WvJxBt" (without quotes)
Software name: "test vector" (without quotes)
Mapped address: 192.0.2.1 port 32853
01 01 00 3c Response type and message length
21 12 a4 42 Magic cookie
b7 e7 a7 01 }
bc 34 d6 86 } Transaction ID
fa 87 df ae }
80 22 00 0b SOFTWARE attribute header
74 65 73 74 }
20 76 65 63 } UTF-8 server name
74 6f 72 20 }
00 20 00 08 XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS attribute header
00 01 a1 47 Address family (IPv4) and xor'd mapped port number
e1 12 a6 43 Xor'd mapped IPv4 address
00 08 00 14 MESSAGE-INTEGRITY attribute header
2b 91 f5 99 }
fd 9e 90 c3 }
8c 74 89 f9 } HMAC-SHA1 fingerprint
2a f9 ba 53 }
f0 6b e7 d7 }
80 28 00 04 FINGERPRINT attribute header
c0 7d 4c 96 CRC32 fingerprint
2.3. Sample IPv6 Response
This response uses the following parameter:
Password: "VOkJxbRl1RmTxUk/WvJxBt" (without quotes)
Software name: "test vector" (without quotes)
Mapped address: 2001:db8:1234:5678:11:2233:4455:6677 port 32853
01 01 00 48 Response type and message length
21 12 a4 42 Magic cookie
b7 e7 a7 01 }
bc 34 d6 86 } Transaction ID
fa 87 df ae }
80 22 00 0b SOFTWARE attribute header
74 65 73 74 }
20 76 65 63 } UTF-8 server name
74 6f 72 20 }
00 20 00 14 XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS attribute header
00 02 a1 47 Address family (IPv6) and xor'd mapped port number
01 13 a9 fa }
a5 d3 f1 79 } Xor'd mapped IPv6 address
bc 25 f4 b5 }
be d2 b9 d9 }
00 08 00 14 MESSAGE-INTEGRITY attribute header
a3 82 95 4e }
4b e6 7b f1 }
17 84 c9 7c } HMAC-SHA1 fingerprint
82 92 c2 75 }
bf e3 ed 41 }
80 28 00 04 FINGERPRINT attribute header
c8 fb 0b 4c CRC32 fingerprint
2.4. Sample Request with Long-Term Authentication
This request uses the following parameters:
Username: "<U+30DE><U+30C8><U+30EA><U+30C3><U+30AF><U+30B9>"
(without quotes) unaffected by SASLprep [RFC4013] processing
Password: "The<U+00AD>M<U+00AA>tr<U+2168>" and "TheMatrIX" (without
quotes) respectively before and after SASLprep processing
Nonce: "f//499k954d6OL34oL9FSTvy64sA" (without quotes)
Realm: "example.org" (without quotes)
00 01 00 60 Request type and message length
21 12 a4 42 Magic cookie
78 ad 34 33 }
c6 ad 72 c0 } Transaction ID
29 da 41 2e }
00 06 00 12 USERNAME attribute header
e3 83 9e e3 }
83 88 e3 83 }
aa e3 83 83 } Username value (18 bytes) and padding (2 bytes)
e3 82 af e3 }
82 b9 00 00 }
00 15 00 1c NONCE attribute header
66 2f 2f 34 }
39 39 6b 39 }
35 34 64 36 }
4f 4c 33 34 } Nonce value
6f 4c 39 46 }
53 54 76 79 }
36 34 73 41 }
00 14 00 0b REALM attribute header
65 78 61 6d }
70 6c 65 2e } Realm value (11 bytes) and padding (1 byte)
6f 72 67 00 }
00 08 00 14 MESSAGE-INTEGRITY attribute header
f6 70 24 65 }
6d d6 4a 3e }
02 b8 e0 71 } HMAC-SHA1 fingerprint
2e 85 c9 a2 }
8c a8 96 66 }
3. Security Considerations
There are no security considerations.
4. Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Marc Petit-Huguenin, Philip Matthews
and Dan Wing for their inputs, and Brian Korver, Alfred E. Heggestad
and Gustavo Garcia for their reviews.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[RFC5389] Rosenberg, J., Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and D. Wing,
"Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389,
October 2008.
[RFC5245] Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
(ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT)
Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, April
2010.
5.2. Informative References
[RFC2104] Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-
Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
February 1997.
[RFC4013] Zeilenga, K., "SASLprep: Stringprep Profile for User Names
and Passwords", RFC 4013, February 2005.
Appendix A. Source Code for Test Vectors
const unsigned char req[] =
"\x00\x01\x00\x58"
"\x21\x12\xa4\x42"
"\xb7\xe7\xa7\x01\xbc\x34\xd6\x86\xfa\x87\xdf\xae"
"\x80\x22\x00\x10"
"STUN test client"
"\x00\x24\x00\x04"
"\x6e\x00\x01\xff"
"\x80\x29\x00\x08"
"\x93\x2f\xf9\xb1\x51\x26\x3b\x36"
"\x00\x06\x00\x09"
"\x65\x76\x74\x6a\x3a\x68\x36\x76\x59\x20\x20\x20"
"\x00\x08\x00\x14"
"\x9a\xea\xa7\x0c\xbf\xd8\xcb\x56\x78\x1e\xf2\xb5"
"\xb2\xd3\xf2\x49\xc1\xb5\x71\xa2"
"\x80\x28\x00\x04"
"\xe5\x7a\x3b\xcf";
Request message
const unsigned char respv4[] =
"\x01\x01\x00\x3c"
"\x21\x12\xa4\x42"
"\xb7\xe7\xa7\x01\xbc\x34\xd6\x86\xfa\x87\xdf\xae"
"\x80\x22\x00\x0b"
"\x74\x65\x73\x74\x20\x76\x65\x63\x74\x6f\x72\x20"
"\x00\x20\x00\x08"
"\x00\x01\xa1\x47\xe1\x12\xa6\x43"
"\x00\x08\x00\x14"
"\x2b\x91\xf5\x99\xfd\x9e\x90\xc3\x8c\x74\x89\xf9"
"\x2a\xf9\xba\x53\xf0\x6b\xe7\xd7"
"\x80\x28\x00\x04"
"\xc0\x7d\x4c\x96";
IPv4 response message
const unsigned char respv6[] =
"\x01\x01\x00\x48"
"\x21\x12\xa4\x42"
"\xb7\xe7\xa7\x01\xbc\x34\xd6\x86\xfa\x87\xdf\xae"
"\x80\x22\x00\x0b"
"\x74\x65\x73\x74\x20\x76\x65\x63\x74\x6f\x72\x20"
"\x00\x20\x00\x14"
"\x00\x02\xa1\x47"
"\x01\x13\xa9\xfa\xa5\xd3\xf1\x79"
"\xbc\x25\xf4\xb5\xbe\xd2\xb9\xd9"
"\x00\x08\x00\x14"
"\xa3\x82\x95\x4e\x4b\xe6\x7b\xf1\x17\x84\xc9\x7c"
"\x82\x92\xc2\x75\xbf\xe3\xed\x41"
"\x80\x28\x00\x04"
"\xc8\xfb\x0b\x4c";
IPv6 response message
const unsigned char reqltc[] =
"\x00\x01\x00\x60"
"\x21\x12\xa4\x42"
"\x78\xad\x34\x33\xc6\xad\x72\xc0\x29\xda\x41\x2e"
"\x00\x06\x00\x12"
"\xe3\x83\x9e\xe3\x83\x88\xe3\x83\xaa\xe3\x83\x83"
"\xe3\x82\xaf\xe3\x82\xb9\x00\x00"
"\x00\x15\x00\x1c"
"\x66\x2f\x2f\x34\x39\x39\x6b\x39\x35\x34\x64\x36"
"\x4f\x4c\x33\x34\x6f\x4c\x39\x46\x53\x54\x76\x79"
"\x36\x34\x73\x41"
"\x00\x14\x00\x0b"
"\x65\x78\x61\x6d\x70\x6c\x65\x2e\x6f\x72\x67\x00"
"\x00\x08\x00\x14"
"\xf6\x70\x24\x65\x6d\xd6\x4a\x3e\x02\xb8\xe0\x71"
"\x2e\x85\xc9\xa2\x8c\xa8\x96\x66";
Request with long-term credentials
Author's Address
Remi Denis-Courmont
Nokia Corporation
P.O. Box 407
NOKIA GROUP 00045
FI
Phone: +358 50 487 6315
EMail: remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com
AI ELI5
On this page
§1Introduction
RFC 5389 defines STUN (Session Traversal Utilities for NAT), a protocol for discovering network address translation, learning public IP addresses, and traversing firewalls. STUN messages include cryptographic checksums and transformed addresses to verify data integrity and hide sensitive information.
This document provides test vectors: sample STUN messages with correct cryptographic values. The three STUN attributes most prone to implementation errors are FINGERPRINT (a CRC32 check), MESSAGE-INTEGRITY (an HMAC-SHA1 authentication code), and XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS (a transformed IP address). The test vectors allow implementers to verify their hashing and XOR code.
This is a cookbook of recipe ingredients and results. Coders follow the recipe and compare their output to these answers to prove they got it right.
§2Sample Messages and Scenarios
The RFC provides four example STUN messages in hexadecimal format, representing common real-world use cases. The first is a request from a client using ICE (Interactive Connectivity Establishment) with username and password. The second and third are IPv4 and IPv6 responses with address translation.
Each message shows all binary bytes and labels each attribute. The examples include the SOFTWARE attribute, PRIORITY for ICE, and ICE-CONTROLLED for role determination. All messages are formatted exactly as a STUN peer would generate or process them, with precise byte positions and padding bytes.
The fourth example tests long-term credential authentication, a different mode where the server challenges the client with a nonce and realm. This example includes Unicode characters in the username to test internationalization handling.
Here are four example letters written in a special code. Each one has all the parts a real letter would have: addresses, stamps, and signatures. You can decode them and check if your answer matches.
§3Using the Test Vectors
To use these vectors, extract the hexadecimal message bytes and input them to a STUN implementation. The implementation should parse the message, verify or recompute the FINGERPRINT and MESSAGE-INTEGRITY values, and transform the XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS. Results must match the values shown in the RFC.
The vectors test the full message format including attribute ordering, message length calculations, and transaction IDs. Padding bytes within attributes must be handled correctly; the RFC notes that padding bytes may take any value (spaces in some vectors, null bytes in others), so implementations must skip them.
Message order matters: MESSAGE-INTEGRITY and FINGERPRINT must be computed and verified in the correct sequence relative to other attributes.
Write down what your code produces for each message. If your answer matches the answer in the document, congratulations! Your code is correct.
§4Security Considerations
Test vectors themselves pose no security risk. However, implementers must ensure their STUN implementations correctly compute FINGERPRINT (CRC32), MESSAGE-INTEGRITY (HMAC-SHA1), and XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS transformations. Any errors in these cryptographic operations would allow an attacker to forge STUN messages or intercept address translations.
The sample messages in this RFC include credentials and authentication codes. These are fictional test values generated specifically for the RFC and should never be used in production systems.
These are fake passwords just for testing. Real systems must keep their actual secrets safe from attackers.