RFC 9447: Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) Challenges Using an Authority Token
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Some proposed extensions to the Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) rely on proving eligibility for certificates through consulting an external authority that issues a token according to a particular policy. This document specifies a generic Authority Token Challenge for ACME that supports subtype claims for different identifiers or namespaces that can be defined separately for specific applications.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9447
- Published
- September 2023
- Authors
- J. Peterson; M. Barnes; D. Hancock; C. Wendt
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- sec
- Pages
- 11
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9891Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) Node ID Validation ExtensionCurrent
November 2025
- RFC 8823Extensions to Automatic Certificate Management Environment for End-User S/MIME CertificatesCurrent
April 2021
- RFC 8737Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) TLS Application-Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) Challenge ExtensionCurrent
February 2020
- RFC 9538Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Delegation Using the Automated Certificate Management EnvironmentCurrent
February 2024
- RFC 9448TNAuthList Profile of Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) Authority TokenCurrent
September 2023
- RFC 9449OAuth 2.0 Demonstrating Proof of Possession (DPoP)Current
September 2023
- RFC 9444Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) for SubdomainsCurrent
August 2023
- RFC 9458Oblivious HTTPCurrent
January 2024
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?