The discsussion, certs and keys are at this thread: https://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2015-September/009007.html 1. RFC-2631 Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2631 The main problem appears: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2631#section-2.2.2 2.2.2. Group Parameter Validation The ASN.1 for DH keys in [PKIX] includes elements j and validation- Parms which MAY be used by recipients of a key to verify that the group parameters were correctly generated. Two checks are possible: 1. Verify that p=qj + 1. This demonstrates that the parameters meet the X9.42 parameter criteria. 2. Verify that when the p,q generation procedure of [FIPS-186] Appendix 2 is followed with seed 'seed', that p is found when 'counter' = pgenCounter. The main problem appears MAY. As I read it, implementation MAY NOT verify it. Sketch of the attack: Chose $q$ product of small primes $p_i$. Solve the discrete logarithm in the $p_i$ subgroups for the public keys. Apply the Chinese remainder theorem to get the privates keys. 2. From the openssl 1.0.1p source: crypto/dsa/dsa_ossl.c:329 i = BN_num_bits(dsa->q); /* fips 186-3 allows only different sizes for q */ if (i != 160 && i != 224 && i != 256) { DSAerr(DSA_F_DSA_DO_VERIFY, DSA_R_BAD_Q_VALUE); return -1; } Forcing small subgroups smells to me... 3. openssl 1.0.1p accepts composite $q$ in sign/verify and over SSL (DSA). The attack in (1) works the same way. Session: ./apps/openssl s_server -accept 8080 -cert ./cacert2.pem -key ./key-comp2.key -HTTP openssl s_client -connect localhost:8080 Server public key is 1204 bit Verify return code: 18 (self signed certificate) sage: q=0x008000000000000000001d8000000000000000012b sage: factor(q) 604462909807314587353111 * 1208925819614629174706189
↧
___: RFC-2631, fips 186-3 and openssl’s implementation of DSA appear broken (and possibly backdoored)
↧