This was noticed by observing we had one line of missing test coverage
in polyval.c. CRYPTO_POLYVAL_update_blocks acts 32 blocks at a time and
all existing test vectors are smaller than that.
Test vector obtained by just picking random values and seeing what our
existing implementation did if I modified CRYPTO_POLYVAL_update_blocks
to consume many more blocks at a time. Then I fixed the bug and ensured
the answer was still the same.
Change-Id: Ib7002dbc10952229ff42a17132c30d0e290d4be5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/13041
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Most C standard library functions are undefined if passed NULL, even
when the corresponding length is zero. This gives them (and, in turn,
all functions which call them) surprising behavior on empty arrays.
Some compilers will miscompile code due to this rule. See also
https://www.imperialviolet.org/2016/06/26/nonnull.html
Add OPENSSL_memcpy, etc., wrappers which avoid this problem.
BUG=23
Change-Id: I95f42b23e92945af0e681264fffaf578e7f8465e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12928
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The original bug only affected their big-endian code which we don't
have, but import the test vector anyway. Imported from upstream's
b47f116b1e02d20b1f8a7488be5a04f7cf5bc712.
Change-Id: I349e41d87006533da0e18c948f9cc7dd15f42a44
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12820
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
We've taken to writing bssl::UniquePtr in full, so it's not buying
us much.
Change-Id: Ia2689366cbb17282c8063608dddcc675518ec0ca
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12628
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
AES-GCM-SIV is an AEAD with nonce-misuse resistance. It can reuse
hardware support for AES-GCM and thus encrypt at ~66% the speed, and
decrypt at 100% the speed, of AES-GCM.
See https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-cfrg-gcmsiv-02
This implementation is generic, not optimised, and reuses existing AES
and GHASH support as much as possible. It is guarded by !OPENSSL_SMALL,
at least for now.
Change-Id: Ia9f77b256ef5dfb8588bb9ecfe6ee0e827626f57
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12541
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
j and md_size are public values, so this can just be done directly. (If
they weren't, we'd have worse problems.) This makes the loop look the
same as the rotation loop below.
Change-Id: Ic75550ad4e40b2015668cb12c26ca2d20bd285b6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12474
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Some declarations can be moved closer to use, etc.
Change-Id: Ifa9a51ad77639b94020b15478af234c82466390f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12473
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Neither branch of the |if| statement is expected to touch |data_len|.
Clarify this by moving |data_len| after the |if| statement.
Change-Id: Ibbc81e5b0c006882672df18442a6e7987064ca6d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11880
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Macros need a healthy dose of parentheses to avoid expression-level
misparses. Most of this comes from the clang-tidy CL here:
https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/235696/
Also switch most of the macros to use do { ... } while (0) to avoid all
the excessive comma operators and statement-level misparses.
Change-Id: I4c2ee51e347d2aa8c74a2d82de63838b03bbb0f9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11660
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This finally removes the last Android hack. Both Chromium and Android
end up needing this thing (Chromium needs it for WebCrypto but currently
uses the EVP_AEAD version and Android needs it by way of
wpa_supplicant).
On the Android side, the alternative is we finish upstream's
NEED_INTERNAL_AES_WRAP patch, but then it just uses its own key-wrap
implementation. This seems a little silly, considering we have a version
of key-wrap under a different API anyway.
It also doesn't make much sense to leave the EVP_AEAD API around if we
don't want people to use it and Chromium's the only consumer. Remove it
and I'll switch Chromium to the new---er, old--- APIs next roll.
Change-Id: I23a89cda25bddb6ac1033e4cd408165f393d1e6c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11410
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change adds AES and GHASH assembly from upstream, with the aim of
speeding up AES-GCM.
The PPC64LE assembly matches the interface of the ARMv8 assembly so I've
changed the prefix of both sets of asm functions to be the same
("aes_hw_").
Otherwise, the new assmebly files and Perlasm match exactly those from
upstream's c536b6be1a (from their master branch).
Before:
Did 1879000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000428us (1878196.1 ops/sec): 30.1 MB/s
Did 61000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1006660us (60596.4 ops/sec): 81.8 MB/s
Did 11000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1072649us (10255.0 ops/sec): 84.0 MB/s
Did 1665000 AES-256-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000591us (1664016.6 ops/sec): 26.6 MB/s
Did 52000 AES-256-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1006971us (51640.0 ops/sec): 69.7 MB/s
Did 8840 AES-256-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1013294us (8724.0 ops/sec): 71.5 MB/s
After:
Did 4994000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000017us (4993915.1 ops/sec): 79.9 MB/s
Did 1389000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1000073us (1388898.6 ops/sec): 1875.0 MB/s
Did 319000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1000101us (318967.8 ops/sec): 2613.0 MB/s
Did 4668000 AES-256-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000149us (4667304.6 ops/sec): 74.7 MB/s
Did 1202000 AES-256-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1000646us (1201224.0 ops/sec): 1621.7 MB/s
Did 269000 AES-256-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1002804us (268247.8 ops/sec): 2197.5 MB/s
Change-Id: Id848562bd4e1aa79a4683012501dfa5e6c08cfcc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11262
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Code acting generically on an EVP_AEAD_CTX may wish to get at the
underlying EVP_AEAD.
Change-Id: I9cc905522ba76402bda4c255aa1488158323b02c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11085
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Matt Braithwaite <mab@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This withdraws support for -DBORINGSSL_ENABLE_RC4_TLS, and removes the
RC4 AEADs.
Change-Id: I1321b76bfe047d180743fa46d1b81c5d70c64e81
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10940
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This was done just by grepping for 'size_t i;' and 'size_t j;'. I left
everything in crypto/x509 and friends alone.
There's some instances in gcm.c that are non-trivial and pulled into a
separate CL for ease of review.
Change-Id: I6515804e3097f7e90855f1e7610868ee87117223
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10801
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Really the only thing we should be doing with these ciphers is hastening
their demise, but it was the weekend and this seemed like fun.
EVP_tls_cbc_copy_mac needs to rotate a buffer by a secret amount. (It
extracts the MAC, but rotated.) We have two codepaths for this. If
CBC_MAC_ROTATE_IN_PLACE is defined (always on), we make some assumptions
abuot cache lines, play games with volatile, and hope that doesn't leak
anything. Otherwise, we do O(N^2) work to constant-time select the
rotation incidences.
But we can do O(N lg N). Rotate by powers of two and constant-time
select by the offset's bit positions. (Handwaivy lower-bound: an array
position has N possible values, so, armed with only a constant-time
select, we need O(lg N) work to resolve it. There's N array positions,
so O(N lg N).)
A microbenchmark of EVP_tls_cbc_copy_mac shows this is 27% faster than
the old one, but still 32% slower than the in-place version.
in-place:
Did 15724000 CopyFromMAC operations in 20000744us (786170.8 ops/sec)
N^2:
Did 8443000 CopyFromMAC operations in 20001582us (422116.6 ops/sec)
N lg N:
Did 10718000 CopyFromMAC operations in 20000763us (535879.6 ops/sec)
This results in the following the CBC ciphers. I measured
AES-128-CBC-SHA1 and AES-256-CBC-SHA384 which are, respectively, the
cipher where the other bits are the fastest and the cipher where N is
largest.
in-place:
Did 2634000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 10000739us (263380.5 ops/sec): 4.2 MB/s
Did 1424000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) open operations in 10002782us (142360.4 ops/sec): 192.2 MB/s
Did 531000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) open operations in 10002460us (53086.9 ops/sec): 434.9 MB/s
N^2:
Did 2529000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 10001474us (252862.7 ops/sec): 4.0 MB/s
Did 1392000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) open operations in 10006659us (139107.4 ops/sec): 187.8 MB/s
Did 528000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) open operations in 10001276us (52793.3 ops/sec): 432.5 MB/s
N lg N:
Did 2531000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 10003057us (253022.7 ops/sec): 4.0 MB/s
Did 1390000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) open operations in 10003287us (138954.3 ops/sec): 187.6 MB/s
Did 531000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) open operations in 10002448us (53087.0 ops/sec): 434.9 MB/s
in-place:
Did 1249000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (16 bytes) open operations in 10001767us (124877.9 ops/sec): 2.0 MB/s
Did 879000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (1350 bytes) open operations in 10009244us (87818.8 ops/sec): 118.6 MB/s
Did 344000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (8192 bytes) open operations in 10025897us (34311.1 ops/sec): 281.1 MB/s
N^2:
Did 1072000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (16 bytes) open operations in 10008090us (107113.3 ops/sec): 1.7 MB/s
Did 780000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (1350 bytes) open operations in 10007787us (77939.3 ops/sec): 105.2 MB/s
Did 333000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (8192 bytes) open operations in 10016332us (33245.7 ops/sec): 272.3 MB/s
N lg N:
Did 1168000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (16 bytes) open operations in 10007671us (116710.5 ops/sec): 1.9 MB/s
Did 836000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (1350 bytes) open operations in 10001536us (83587.2 ops/sec): 112.8 MB/s
Did 339000 AES-256-CBC-SHA384 (8192 bytes) open operations in 10018522us (33837.3 ops/sec): 277.2 MB/s
TLS CBC performance isn't as important as it was before, and the costs
aren't that high, so avoid making assumptions about cache lines. (If we
care much about CBC open performance, we probably should get the malloc
out of EVP_tls_cbc_digest_record at the end.)
Change-Id: Ib8d8271be4b09e5635062cd3b039e1e96f0d9d3d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11003
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Now that we have the extern "C++" trick, we can just embed them in the
normal headers. Move the EVP_CIPHER_CTX deleter to cipher.h and, in
doing so, take away a little bit of boilerplate in defining deleters.
Change-Id: I4a4b8d0db5274a3607914d94e76a38996bd611ec
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10804
Reviewed-by: Matt Braithwaite <mab@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Change-Id: Ie60744761f5aa434a71a998f5ca98a8f8b1c25d5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10447
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
The old one was rather confusing. Switch to returning 1/0 for whether
the padding is publicly invalid and then add an output argument which
returns a constant_time_eq-style boolean.
Change-Id: Ieba89d352faf80e9bcea993b716f4b2df5439d4b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10222
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Add the following cases:
- Maximal padding
- Maximal padding with each possible byte position wrong.
- When the input is not publicly too short to find a MAC, but the
unpadded value is too short. (This tests that
EVP_tls_cbc_remove_padding and EVP_tls_cbc_copy_mac coordinate
correctly. EVP_tls_cbc_remove_padding promises to also consider it
invalid padding if there is no room for a MAC.)
Change-Id: I8fe18121afb915e579a8236d0e3ef354f1f835bc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10182
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Initial stab at moving contents of scoped_types.h into
include/openssl/c++ and into the |bssl| namespace.
Started with one file. Will do the remaining ones once this looks good.
Change-Id: I51e2f7c1acbe52d508f1faee7740645f91f56386
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/9175
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This is very far from all of it, but I did some easy ones before I got
bored. Snapshot the progress until someone else wants to continue this.
BUG=22
Change-Id: I2609e9766d883a273e53e01a75a4b1d4700e2436
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/9132
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This reverts commits:
8d79ed674019fdcb52348d79ed6740
Because WebRTC (at least) includes our headers in an extern "C" block,
which precludes having any C++ in them.
Change-Id: Ia849f43795a40034cbd45b22ea680b51aab28b2d
This change scatters the contents of the two scoped_types.h files into
the headers for each of the areas of the code. The types are now in the
|bssl| namespace.
Change-Id: I802b8de68fba4786b6a0ac1bacd11d81d5842423
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8731
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We currently have the situation where the |tool| and |bssl_shim| code
includes scoped_types.h from crypto/test and ssl/test. That's weird and
shouldn't happen. Also, our C++ consumers might quite like to have
access to the scoped types.
Thus this change moves some of the template code to base.h and puts it
all in a |bssl| namespace to prepare for scattering these types into
their respective headers. In order that all the existing test code be
able to access these types, it's all moved into the same namespace.
Change-Id: I3207e29474dc5fcc344ace43119df26dae04eabb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8730
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
There's a __pragma expression which allows this. Android builds us Windows with
MinGW for some reason, so we actually do have to tolerate non-MSVC-compatible
Windows compilers. (Clang for Windows is much more sensible than MinGW and
intentionally mimicks MSVC.)
MinGW doesn't understand MSVC's pragmas and warns a lot. #pragma warning is
safe to suppress, so wrap those to shush them. This also lets us do away with a
few ifdefs.
Change-Id: I1f5a8bec4940d4b2d947c4c1cc9341bc15ec4972
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8236
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
While most of OpenSSL's assembly allows out < in too, some of it doesn't.
Upstream seems to not consider this a problem (or, at least, they're failing to
make a decision on whether it is a problem, so we should assume they'll stay
their course). Accordingly, require aliased buffers to exactly align so we
don't have to keep chasing this down.
Change-Id: I00eb3df3e195b249116c68f7272442918d7077eb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8231
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Some files were named 𝑥_test.txt and some 𝑥_tests.txt. This change
unifies around the latter.
Change-Id: Id6f29bad8b998f3c3466655097ef593f7f18f82f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8150
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
An overflow can occur in the EVP_EncryptUpdate function. If an attacker is
able to supply very large amounts of input data after a previous call to
EVP_EncryptUpdate with a partial block then a length check can overflow
resulting in a heap corruption.
Following an analysis of all OpenSSL internal usage of the
EVP_EncryptUpdate function all usage is one of two forms.
The first form is like this:
EVP_EncryptInit()
EVP_EncryptUpdate()
i.e. where the EVP_EncryptUpdate() call is known to be the first called
function after an EVP_EncryptInit(), and therefore that specific call
must be safe.
The second form is where the length passed to EVP_EncryptUpdate() can be seen
from the code to be some small value and therefore there is no possibility of
an overflow. [BoringSSL: We also have code that calls EVP_CIPHER functions by
way of the TLS/SSL3 "AEADs". However, there we know the inputs are bounded by
2^16.]
Since all instances are one of these two forms, I believe that there can
be no overflows in internal code due to this problem.
It should be noted that EVP_DecryptUpdate() can call EVP_EncryptUpdate()
in certain code paths. Also EVP_CipherUpdate() is a synonym for
EVP_EncryptUpdate(). Therefore I have checked all instances of these
calls too, and came to the same conclusion, i.e. there are no instances
in internal usage where an overflow could occur.
This could still represent a security issue for end user code that calls
this function directly.
CVE-2016-2106
Issue reported by Guido Vranken.
(Imported from upstream's 3ab937bc440371fbbe74318ce494ba95021f850a.)
Change-Id: Iabde896555c39899c7f0f6baf7a163a7b3c2f3d6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7845
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Also switch the EVP_CIPHER copy to cut down on how frequently we need to cast
back and forth.
BUG=22
Change-Id: I9af1e586ca27793a4ee6193bbb348cf2b28a126e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7689
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This slipped through, but all the callers are now using
EVP_aead_chacha20_poly1305, so we can remove this version.
Change-Id: I76eb3a4481aae4d18487ca96ebe3776e60d6abe8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7650
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
A lot of consumers of obj.h only want the NID values. Others didn't need
it at all. This also removes some OBJ_nid2sn and OBJ_nid2ln calls in EVP
error paths which isn't worth pulling a large table in for.
BUG=chromium:499653
Change-Id: Id6dff578f993012e35b740a13b8e4f9c2edc0744
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7563
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Many of the compatibility issues are described at
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt612856.aspx. The macros
that suppressed warnings on a per-function basis no longer work in
Update 1, so replace them with #pragmas. Update 1 warns when |size_t|
arguments to |printf| are casted, so stop doing that casting.
Unfortunately, this requires an ugly hack to continue working in
MSVC 2013 as MSVC 2013 doesn't support "%zu". Finally, Update 1 has new
warnings, some of which need to be suppressed.
---
Updated by davidben to give up on suppressing warnings in crypto/x509 and
crypto/x509v3 as those directories aren't changed much from upstream. In each
of these cases, upstream opted just blindly initialize the variable, so do the
same. Also switch C4265 to level 4, per Microsoft's recommendation and work
around a bug in limits.h that happens to get fixed by Google include order
style.
(limits.h is sensitive to whether corecrt.h, pulled in by stddef.h and some
other headers, is included before it. The reason it affected just one file is
we often put the file's header first, which means base.h is pulling in
stddef.h. Relying on this is ugly, but it's no worse than what everything else
is doing and this doesn't seem worth making something as tame as limits.h so
messy to use.)
Change-Id: I02d1f935356899f424d3525d03eca401bfa3e6cd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7480
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Partially fixes build with -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations.
Change-Id: I51209c30f532899f57cfdd9a50cff0a8ee3da5b5
Signed-off-by: Piotr Sikora <piotrsikora@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7512
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Change-Id: I44aa9be26ad9aea6771cb46a886a721b4bc28fde
Signed-off-by: Piotr Sikora <piotrsikora@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7510
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Cases where the input and output buffers overlap are always a little
odd. This change adds a test to ensures that the (generic) AEADs
function in these situations.
Change-Id: I6f1987a5e10ddef6b2b8f037a6d50737a120bc99
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7195
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This change causes cipher_test to test the EVP cipher interfaces with
various chunk sizes and adds a couple of large tests of GCM. This is
sufficient to uncover the issue that would have been caused by a3d9528e,
had the AVX code been enabled.
Change-Id: I58d4924c0bcd11a0999c24a0fb77fc5eee71130f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7192
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This change makes the AEAD and EVP code paths use the same code for
AES-GCM. When AVX instructions are enabled in the assembly this will
allow them to use the stitched AES-GCM implementation.
Note that the stitched implementations are no-ops for small inputs
(smaller than 288 bytes for encryption; smaller than 96 bytes for
decryption). This means that only a handful of test cases with longish
inputs actually test the stitched code.
Change-Id: Iece8003d90448dcac9e0bde1f42ff102ebe1a1c9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7173
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Division isn't constant-time on Intel chips so the code was adding a
large multiple of md_size to try and force the operation to always take
the maximum amount of time.
I'm less convinced, these days, that compilers aren't going to get smart
enough to optimise that away so use Barrett reduction instead.
Change-Id: Ib8c514192682a2fcb4b1fb7e7c6dd1301d9888d0
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6906
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <alangley@gmail.com>
MSVC doesn't have stdalign.h and so doesn't support |alignas| in C
code. Define |alignas(x)| as a synonym for |__decltype(align(x))|
instead for it.
This also fixes -Wcast-qual warnings in rsaz_exp.c.
Change-Id: Ifce9031724cb93f5a4aa1f567e7af61b272df9d5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6924
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This removes 16k from a release-mode build of the bssl tool. Now that we've
finished the AEAD refactor, there's no use in keeping this around as a
prototype for "stateful AEADs".
Before:
Did 2264000 RC4-MD5 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000430us (2263026.9 ops/sec): 36.2 MB/s
Did 266000 RC4-MD5 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1000984us (265738.5 ops/sec): 358.7 MB/s
Did 50000 RC4-MD5 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1014209us (49299.5 ops/sec): 403.9 MB/s
After:
Did 1895000 RC4-MD5 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000239us (1894547.2 ops/sec): 30.3 MB/s
Did 199000 RC4-MD5 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1001361us (198729.5 ops/sec): 268.3 MB/s
Did 39000 RC4-MD5 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1014832us (38430.0 ops/sec): 314.8 MB/s
There is a non-trivial performance hit, but this cipher doesn't matter much and
the stitched mode code reaches into MD5_CTX and RC4_KEY in somewhat unfortunate
ways.
Change-Id: I9ecd28d6afb54e90ce61baecc641742af2ae6269
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6752
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We can reuse the HMAC_CTX that stores the key. The API is kind of unfortunate
as, in principle, it should be possible to do an allocation-averse HMAC with a
shared key on multiple threads at once (EVP_AEAD_CTX is normally logically
const). At some point it may be worth rethinking those APIs somewhat. But
these "stateful AEADs" are already stateful in their EVP_CIPHER_CTX, so this is
fine.
Each cipher was run individually to minimize the effect of other ciphers doing
their mallocs. (Although the cost of a malloc is presumably going to depend a
lot on the malloc implementation and what's happened before in the process, so
take these numbers with a bucket of salt. They vary widely even with the same
arguments.)
Taking malloc out of seal/open also helps with the malloc tests. DTLS currently
cannot distinguish a malloc failure (should be fatal) from a decryption failure
(not fatal), so the malloc tests get stuck. But this doesn't completely get us
there since tls_cbc.c mallocs. This also assumes EVP_CIPHER_CTX, EVP_MD_CTX,
and HMAC_CTX are all clever about reusing their allocations when reset (which
they are).
Before:
Did 1315000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000087us (1314885.6 ops/sec): 21.0 MB/s
Did 181000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1004918us (180114.2 ops/sec): 243.2 MB/s
Did 34000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1024250us (33195.0 ops/sec): 271.9 MB/s
After:
Did 1766000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000319us (1765436.8 ops/sec): 28.2 MB/s
Did 187000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1004002us (186254.6 ops/sec): 251.4 MB/s
Did 35000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1014885us (34486.7 ops/sec): 282.5 MB/s
Before:
Did 391000 DES-EDE3-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000038us (390985.1 ops/sec): 6.3 MB/s
Did 16000 DES-EDE3-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1060226us (15091.1 ops/sec): 20.4 MB/s
Did 2827 DES-EDE3-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1035971us (2728.8 ops/sec): 22.4 MB/s
After:
Did 444000 DES-EDE3-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1001814us (443196.0 ops/sec): 7.1 MB/s
Did 17000 DES-EDE3-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1042535us (16306.4 ops/sec): 22.0 MB/s
Did 2590 DES-EDE3-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1012378us (2558.3 ops/sec): 21.0 MB/s
Before:
Did 1316000 AES-256-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000510us (1315329.2 ops/sec): 21.0 MB/s
Did 157000 AES-256-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1002944us (156539.1 ops/sec): 211.3 MB/s
Did 29000 AES-256-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1030284us (28147.6 ops/sec): 230.6 MB/s
After:
Did 1645000 AES-256-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000313us (1644485.3 ops/sec): 26.3 MB/s
Did 162000 AES-256-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1003060us (161505.8 ops/sec): 218.0 MB/s
Did 36000 AES-256-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1014819us (35474.3 ops/sec): 290.6 MB/s
Before:
Did 1435000 RC4-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000245us (1434648.5 ops/sec): 23.0 MB/s
Did 207000 RC4-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1004675us (206036.8 ops/sec): 278.1 MB/s
Did 38000 RC4-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1022712us (37156.1 ops/sec): 304.4 MB/s
After:
Did 1853000 RC4-SHA1 (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000433us (1852198.0 ops/sec): 29.6 MB/s
Did 206000 RC4-SHA1 (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1002370us (205512.9 ops/sec): 277.4 MB/s
Did 42000 RC4-SHA1 (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1024209us (41007.3 ops/sec): 335.9 MB/s
Change-Id: I0edb89bddf146cf91a8e7a99c56b2278c8f38094
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6751
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The consumers have all been updated, so we can move EVP_aead_chacha20_poly1305
to its final state. Unfortunately, the _rfc7539-suffixed version will need to
stick around for just a hair longer. Also the tls1.h macros, but the remaining
consumers are okay with that changing underneath them.
Change-Id: Ibbb70ec1860d6ac6a7e1d7b45e70fe692bf5ebe5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6600
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6101 was mismerged from *ring* and
lost some tests. Also add the corresponding tag truncation tests for the new
construction. So long as we have that feature, we should have tests for it.
(Although, do we actually need to support it?)
Change-Id: I70784cbac345e0ad11b496102856c53932b7362e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6682
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Some strange toolchains can have an implicit (or explicit) fcntl.h include,
so let's avoid using the name 'open' for local functions. This should not
cause any trouble.
Change-Id: Ie131b5920ac23938013c2c03302b97a7418c7180
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6540
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
stdint.h already has macros for this. The spec says that, in C++,
__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS is needed, so define it for bytestring_test.cc.
Chromium seems to use these macros without trouble, so I'm assuming we
can rely on them.
Change-Id: I56d178689b44d22c6379911bbb93d3b01dd832a3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6510
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
