This has no behavior change, but it has a semantic one. This CL is an
assertion that all BIGNUM functions tolerate non-minimal BIGNUMs now.
Specifically:
- Functions that do not touch top/width are assumed to not care.
- Functions that do touch top/width will be changed by this CL. These
should be checked in review that they tolerate non-minimal BIGNUMs.
Subsequent CLs will start adjusting the widths that BIGNUM functions
output, to fix timing leaks.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: I3a2b41b071f2174452f8d3801bce5c78947bb8f7
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25257
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Give a non-minimal modulus, there are two possible values of R we might
pick: 2^(BN_BITS2 * width) or 2^(BN_BITS2 * bn_minimal_width).
Potentially secret moduli would make the former attractive and things
might even work, but our only secret moduli (RSA) have public bit
widths. It's more cases to test and the usual BIGNUM invariant is that
widths do not affect numerical output.
Thus, settle on minimizing mont->N for now. With the top explicitly made
minimal, computing |lgBigR| is also a little simpler.
This CL also abstracts out the < R check in the RSA code, and implements
it in a width-agnostic way.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: I354643df30530db7866bb7820e34241d7614f3c2
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25250
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This makes it easier going to and from non-minimal BIGNUMs and words
without worrying about the widths which are ultimately to become less
friendly.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: Ia57cb29164c560b600573c27b112ad9375a86aad
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25245
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Thanks to Andres Erbsen for extremely helpful suggestions on how finally
plug this long-standing hole!
OpenSSL BIGNUMs are currently minimal-width, which means they cannot be
constant-time. We'll need to either excise BIGNUM from RSA and EC or
somehow fix BIGNUM. EC_SCALAR and later EC_FELEM work will excise it
from EC, but RSA's BIGNUMs are more transparent. Teaching BIGNUM to
handle non-minimal word widths is probably simpler.
The main constraint is BIGNUM's large "calculator" API surface. One
could, in theory, do arbitrary math on RSA components, which means all
public functions must tolerate non-minimal inputs. This is also useful
for EC; https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/24445 is
silly.
As a first step, fix comparison-type functions that were assuming
minimal BIGNUMs. I've also added bn_resize_words, but it is testing-only
until the rest of the library is fixed.
bn->top is now a loose upper bound we carry around. It does not affect
numerical results, only performance and secrecy. This is a departure
from the original meaning, and compiler help in auditing everything is
nice, so the final change in this series will rename bn->top to
bn->width. Thus these new functions are named per "width", not "top".
Looking further ahead, how are output BIGNUM widths determined? There's
three notions of correctness here:
1. Do I compute the right answer for all widths?
2. Do I handle secret data in constant time?
3. Does my memory usage not balloon absurdly?
For (1), a BIGNUM function must give the same answer for all input
widths. BN_mod_add_quick may assume |a| < |m|, but |a| may still be
wider than |m| by way of leading zeres. The simplest approach is to
write code in a width-agnostic way and rely on functions to accept all
widths. Where functions need to look at bn->d, we'll a few helper
functions to smooth over funny widths.
For (2), (1) is little cumbersome. Consider constant-time modular
addition. A sane type system would guarantee input widths match. But C
is weak here, and bifurcating the internals is a lot of work. Thus, at
least for now, I do not propose we move RSA's internal computation out
of BIGNUM. (EC_SCALAR/EC_FELEM are valuable for EC because we get to
stack-allocate, curves were already specialized, and EC only has two
types with many operations on those types. None of these apply to RSA.
We've got numbers mod n, mod p, mod q, and their corresponding
exponents, each of which is used for basically one operation.)
Instead, constant-time BIGNUM functions will output non-minimal widths.
This is trivial for BN_bin2bn or modular arithmetic. But for BN_mul,
constant-time[*] would dictate r->top = a->top + b->top. A calculator
repeatedly multiplying by one would then run out of memory. Those we'll
split into a private BN_mul_fixed for crypto, leaving BN_mul for
calculators. BN_mul is just BN_mul_fixed followed by bn_correct_top.
[*] BN_mul is not constant-time for other reasons, but that will be
fixed separately.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: Ide2258ae8c09a9a41bb71d6777908d1c27917069
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25244
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
(The BN_num_bits_word implementation was originally written by Andy
Polyakov for OpenSSL. See also
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/5154.)
BN_num_bits, by way of BN_num_bits_word, currently leaks the
most-significant word of its argument via branching and memory access
pattern.
BN_num_bits is called on RSA prime factors in various places. These have
public bit lengths, but all bits beyond the high bit are secret. This
fully resolves those cases.
There are a few places where BN_num_bits is called on an input where
the bit length is also secret. The two left in BoringSSL are:
- BN_mod_exp_mont_consttime calls it on the RSA private exponent.
- The timing "fix" to add the order to k in DSA.
This does *not* fully resolve those cases as we still only look at the
top word. Today, that is guaranteed to be non-zero, but only because of
the long-standing bn_correct_top timing leak. Once that is fixed (I hope
to have patches soon), a constant-time BN_num_bits on such inputs must
count bits on each word.
Instead, those cases should not call BN_num_bits at all. The former uses
the bit width to pick windows, but it should be using the maximum bit
width. The next patch will fix this. The latter is the same "fix" we
excised from ECDSA in a838f9dc7e. That
should be excised from DSA after the bn_correct_top bug is fixed.
Thanks to Dinghao Wu, Danfeng Zhang, Shuai Wang, Pei Wang, and Xiao Liu
for reporting this issue.
Change-Id: Idc3da518cc5ec18bd8688b95f959b15300a57c14
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25184
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
crypto/{asn1,x509,x509v3,pem} were skipped as they are still OpenSSL
style.
Change-Id: I3cd9a60e1cb483a981aca325041f3fbce294247c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/19504
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
