We usually name output parameters 'out'. (Someone made a C++ templating
change in Chromium which messed up const-ness, saw the compile error,
and thought it was in MD5_Final.) Also tag the parameters with the
sizes.
Sadly, there's a bit of goofiness around SHA224_Final/SHA256_Final and
SHA384_Final/SHA512_Final, but they're just documentation anyway.
(Though it does touch on the mess that is sha->md_len which would be
nice to clear through somehow.)
Change-Id: I1918b7eecfe13f13b217d01d4414ac2358802354
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35484
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The new version has trap flag emulation, which is great for our ABI
tests. This CL doesn't enable it yet, however. The emulation is slightly
off on when traps start and stop, so the ABI tester will need to tweaked
to be more lenient.
Change-Id: I0eb20176dc63eaa1c35f77379b34f7bb6c0b0407
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35464
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
When building node with boringssl, `SSL_CTX_get_min_proto_version` and
`SSL_CTX_get_max_proto_version` are used. Openssl exposes those; this
change adds support for boringssl.
For this to work right in DTLS, we switch conf_{min,max}_version to store wire
versions, rather than our internal normalized versions.
Change-Id: I282ed224806c41f69e6f166ca97c6cc05ff51f17
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35404
Reviewed-by: Nitish Sakhawalkar <nitsakh@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
With bsaes-x86_64.pl gone, it is no longer needed. Depending on how armv7 works
(if vpaes-armv7.pl is too slow AND on-demand vpaes->bsaes key conversion is not
viable), we may need to bring it back, but get it out of the way for now.
Bug: 256
Change-Id: I762c83097bd03d88574ae1ae16b88fca6826f655
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35365
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Brian Smith suggested applying vpaes-armv8's "2x" optimization to
vpaes-x86_64. The registers are a little tight (aarch64 has a whole 32
SIMD registers, while x86_64 only has 16), but it's doable with some
spills and makes vpaes much more competitive with bsaes. At small- and
medium-sized inputs, vpaes now matches bsaes. At large inputs, it's a
~10% perf hit.
bsaes is thus pulling much less weight. Losing an entire AES
implementation and having constant-time AES for SSSE3 is attractive.
Some notes:
- The fact that these are older CPUs tempers the perf hit, but CPUs
without AES-NI are still common enough to matter.
- This CL does regress CBC decrypt performance nontrivially (see below).
If this matters, we can double-up CBC decryption too. CBC in TLS is
legacy and already pays a costly Lucky13 mitigation.
- The difference between 1350 and 8192 bytes is likely bsaes AES-GCM
paying for two slow (and variable-time!) aes_nohw_encrypt
calls for EK0 and the trailing partial block. At larger inputs, those
two calls are more amortized.
- To that end, bsaes would likely be much faster on AES-GCM with smarter
use of bsaes. (Fold one-off calls above into bulk data.) Implementing
this is a bit of a nuisance though, especially considering we don't
wish to regress hwaes.
- I'd discarded the key conversion idea, but I think I did it wrong.
Benchmarks from
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/33589 suggest
converting to bsaes format on-demand for large ctr32 inputs should
give the best of both worlds, but at the cost of an entire AES
implementation relative to this CL.
- ARMv7 still depends on bsaes and has no vpaes. It also has 16 SIMD
registers, so my plan is to translate it, with the same 2x
optimization, and see how it compares. Hopefully that, or some
combination of the above, will work for ARMv7.
Sandy Bridge
bsaes (before):
Did 3144750 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (626943.8 ops/sec): 10.0 MB/s
Did 2053750 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (409439.8 ops/sec): 104.8 MB/s
Did 469000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 5015000us (93519.4 ops/sec): 126.3 MB/s
Did 92500 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (18441.0 ops/sec): 151.1 MB/s
Did 46750 AES-128-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 5032000us (9290.5 ops/sec): 152.2 MB/s
vpaes-1x (for reference, not this CL):
Did 8684750 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 5015000us (1731754.7 ops/sec): 27.7 MB/s [+177%]
Did 1731500 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (345195.4 ops/sec): 88.4 MB/s [-15.6%]
Did 346500 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (69078.9 ops/sec): 93.3 MB/s [-26.1%]
Did 61250 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 5015000us (12213.4 ops/sec): 100.1 MB/s [-33.8%]
Did 32500 AES-128-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 5031000us (6459.9 ops/sec): 105.8 MB/s [-30.5%]
vpaes-2x (this CL):
Did 8840000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 5015000us (1762711.9 ops/sec): 28.2 MB/s [+182%]
Did 2167750 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (432167.1 ops/sec): 110.6 MB/s [+5.5%]
Did 474000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 5016000us (94497.6 ops/sec): 127.6 MB/s [+1.0%]
Did 81750 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 5015000us (16301.1 ops/sec): 133.5 MB/s [-11.6%]
Did 41750 AES-128-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 5031000us (8298.5 ops/sec): 136.0 MB/s [-10.6%]
Penryn
bsaes (before):
Did 958000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000264us (957747.2 ops/sec): 15.3 MB/s
Did 420000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1000480us (419798.5 ops/sec): 107.5 MB/s
Did 96000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1001083us (95896.1 ops/sec): 129.5 MB/s
Did 18000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1042491us (17266.3 ops/sec): 141.4 MB/s
Did 9482 AES-128-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 1095703us (8653.8 ops/sec): 141.8 MB/s
Did 758000 AES-256-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000769us (757417.5 ops/sec): 12.1 MB/s
Did 359000 AES-256-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1001993us (358285.9 ops/sec): 91.7 MB/s
Did 82000 AES-256-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1009583us (81221.7 ops/sec): 109.6 MB/s
Did 15000 AES-256-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1022294us (14672.9 ops/sec): 120.2 MB/s
Did 7884 AES-256-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 1070934us (7361.8 ops/sec): 120.6 MB/s
vpaes-1x (for reference, not this CL):
Did 2030000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000227us (2029539.3 ops/sec): 32.5 MB/s [+112%]
Did 382000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1001949us (381256.9 ops/sec): 97.6 MB/s [-9.2%]
Did 81000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1007297us (80413.2 ops/sec): 108.6 MB/s [-16.1%]
Did 14000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1031499us (13572.5 ops/sec): 111.2 MB/s [-21.4%]
Did 7008 AES-128-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 1030706us (6799.2 ops/sec): 111.4 MB/s [-21.4%]
Did 1838000 AES-256-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000238us (1837562.7 ops/sec): 29.4 MB/s [+143%]
Did 321000 AES-256-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1001666us (320466.1 ops/sec): 82.0 MB/s [-10.6%]
Did 67000 AES-256-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1010359us (66313.1 ops/sec): 89.5 MB/s [-18.3%]
Did 12000 AES-256-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1072706us (11186.7 ops/sec): 91.6 MB/s [-23.8%]
Did 5680 AES-256-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 1009214us (5628.1 ops/sec): 92.2 MB/s [-23.5%]
vpaes-2x (this CL):
Did 2072000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000066us (2071863.3 ops/sec): 33.1 MB/s [+116%]
Did 432000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1000732us (431684.0 ops/sec): 110.5 MB/s [+2.8%]
Did 92000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1000580us (91946.7 ops/sec): 124.1 MB/s [-4.2%]
Did 16000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1016422us (15741.5 ops/sec): 129.0 MB/s [-8.8%]
Did 8448 AES-128-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 1073962us (7866.2 ops/sec): 128.9 MB/s [-9.1%]
Did 1865000 AES-256-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000043us (1864919.8 ops/sec): 29.8 MB/s [+146%]
Did 364000 AES-256-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1001561us (363432.7 ops/sec): 93.0 MB/s [+1.4%]
Did 77000 AES-256-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1004123us (76683.8 ops/sec): 103.5 MB/s [-5.6%]
Did 14000 AES-256-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1071179us (13069.7 ops/sec): 107.1 MB/s [-10.9%]
Did 7008 AES-256-GCM (16384 bytes) seal operations in 1074125us (6524.4 ops/sec): 106.9 MB/s [-11.4%]
Penryn, CBC mode decryption
bsaes (before):
Did 159000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 1001019us (158838.1 ops/sec): 2.5 MB/s
Did 114000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (256 bytes) open operations in 1006485us (113265.5 ops/sec): 29.0 MB/s
Did 65000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) open operations in 1008441us (64455.9 ops/sec): 87.0 MB/s
Did 17000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) open operations in 1005440us (16908.0 ops/sec): 138.5 MB/s
vpaes (after):
Did 167000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 1003556us (166408.3 ops/sec): 2.7 MB/s [+8%]
Did 112000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (256 bytes) open operations in 1005673us (111368.2 ops/sec): 28.5 MB/s [-1.7%]
Did 56000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (1350 bytes) open operations in 1005647us (55685.5 ops/sec): 75.2 MB/s [-13.6%]
Did 13635 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (8192 bytes) open operations in 1020486us (13361.3 ops/sec): 109.5 MB/s [-20.9%]
Bug: 256
Change-Id: I11ed773323ec7a5ee61080c9ed9ed4761849828a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35364
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
When servers have a lot of data to send and aren't as latency-sensitive,
it makes sense to send large TLS records, so we care about measuring
both packet-sized and full-sized payloads.
Change-Id: Ib0cf5e0f8660f68a98a04fa86b5989d4a485528b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35344
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
While allocating near INT_MAX BIGNUMs or stack frames would never happen, we
should properly handle overflow here. Rewrite it to just be a STACK_OF(BIGNUM)
plus a stack of indices. Also simplify the error-handling. If we make the
errors truly sticky (rather than just sticky per frame), we don't need to keep
track of err_stack and friends.
Thanks to mlbrown for reporting the integer overflows in the original
implementation.
Bug: chromium:942269
Change-Id: Ie9c9baea3eeb82d65d88b1cb1388861f5cd84fe5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35328
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
BN_mod_exp_mont is most commonly used in RSA verification, where the exponent
sizes are small enough to use 1-bit "windows". There's no need to allocate the
extra BIGNUM.
Change-Id: I14fb523dfae7d77d2cec10a0209f09f22031d1af
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35327
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The legacy ASN.1 stack contains an unsalvageable mix of integer types.
82dfea8d9e bounded all inputs to the template
machinery, but sometimes code will call ASN1_get_object directly, such as the
just deleted d2i_ASN1_UINTEGER.
Thanks to mlbrown for reporting the d2i_ASN1_UINTEGER overflow.
Bug: chromium:942269
Change-Id: I2d4c8b7faf5dadd1b68dbdb51a5feae071ea2cb6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35325
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It is unused. It dates to an old OpenSSL DSA serialization bug.
Bug: chromium:942269
Update-Note: Removing a function.
Change-Id: Ia98f7eb1dafcd832c744387475cc13b58bc82ffe
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35324
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
When the CBC and CTR EVP_CIPHER implementations use bsaes, they never
call dat->block. Note this is *not* true of aes_ctr_set_key which is
used in contexts where it needs single-block operations.
Bug: 256
Change-Id: Ibea4f2117a2220cd5cb09f6cf12b7a50c28bf794
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35168
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This makes AES-GCM always constant-time on aarch64 (provided assembly is
enabled). Unlike vpaes, this does come at a binary size penalty of 1K
compared to the gcm_*_4bit version.
ABI testing already covered by GCMTest.ABI (GHASH_ASM_ARM covers both
OPENSSL_ARM and OPENSSL_AARCH64.)
Cortex-A53 (Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+)
Before:
Did 274000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1003461us (273055.0 ops/sec): 4.4 MB/s
Did 53000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1007689us (52595.6 ops/sec): 13.5 MB/s
Did 12000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1075908us (11153.4 ops/sec): 15.1 MB/s
Did 2068 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1089037us (1898.9 ops/sec): 15.6 MB/s
After:
Did 298000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1002917us (297133.3 ops/sec): 4.8 MB/s
Did 64000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1001124us (63928.1 ops/sec): 16.4 MB/s
Did 14000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1015477us (13786.6 ops/sec): 18.6 MB/s
Did 2497 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1057951us (2360.2 ops/sec): 19.3 MB/s
Bug: 265
Change-Id: I251bf0f2eae0578580bb14192755e5d8ff64cd14
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35285
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This plugs all bsaes fallback leaks for CBC outside of the key schedule.
The CBC EVP_CIPHERs never call the block function directly when there's
a stream.cbc function available.
This affects CBC decryptions of length < 128 or 16 mod 128.
Performance-wise, we don't really care about CBC apart from passing
glances at its use in TLS. There, the Lucky13 workaround mutes the
effects.
Cortex-A53 (Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+)
Before:
Did 78000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 3020254us (25825.6 ops/sec): 0.4 MB/s
Did 75000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (32 bytes) open operations in 3005760us (24952.1 ops/sec): 0.8 MB/s
Did 71000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (64 bytes) open operations in 3038137us (23369.6 ops/sec): 1.5 MB/s
Did 67000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (96 bytes) open operations in 3027686us (22129.1 ops/sec): 2.1 MB/s
Did 64000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (112 bytes) open operations in 3005491us (21294.4 ops/sec): 2.4 MB/s
Did 59000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (128 bytes) open operations in 3020083us (19535.9 ops/sec): 2.5 MB/s
Did 53000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (240 bytes) open operations in 3020105us (17549.1 ops/sec): 4.2 MB/s
After:
Did 71668 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 3020896us (23724.1 ops/sec): 0.4 MB/s
Did 71000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (32 bytes) open operations in 3040826us (23348.9 ops/sec): 0.7 MB/s
Did 68000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (64 bytes) open operations in 3009913us (22592.0 ops/sec): 1.4 MB/s
Did 66000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (96 bytes) open operations in 3007597us (21944.4 ops/sec): 2.1 MB/s
Did 59000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (112 bytes) open operations in 3002878us (19647.8 ops/sec): 2.2 MB/s
Did 59000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (128 bytes) open operations in 3046786us (19364.7 ops/sec): 2.5 MB/s
Did 50000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (240 bytes) open operations in 3043643us (16427.7 ops/sec): 3.9 MB/s
Penryn (Mac mini, mid 2010)
Before:
Did 152000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 1004422us (151330.8 ops/sec): 2.4 MB/s
Did 143000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (32 bytes) open operations in 1000443us (142936.7 ops/sec): 4.6 MB/s
Did 136000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (48 bytes) open operations in 1006580us (135111.0 ops/sec): 6.5 MB/s
Did 146000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (96 bytes) open operations in 1005731us (145168.0 ops/sec): 13.9 MB/s
Did 138000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (112 bytes) open operations in 1003330us (137542.0 ops/sec): 15.4 MB/s
Did 133000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (128 bytes) open operations in 1005876us (132223.1 ops/sec): 16.9 MB/s
Did 117000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (240 bytes) open operations in 1004922us (116426.9 ops/sec): 27.9 MB/s
After:
Did 159000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (16 bytes) open operations in 1000505us (158919.7 ops/sec): 2.5 MB/s
Did 157000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (32 bytes) open operations in 1006091us (156049.5 ops/sec): 5.0 MB/s
Did 154000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (48 bytes) open operations in 1002720us (153582.3 ops/sec): 7.4 MB/s
Did 146000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (96 bytes) open operations in 1002567us (145626.2 ops/sec): 14.0 MB/s
Did 135000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (112 bytes) open operations in 1001212us (134836.6 ops/sec): 15.1 MB/s
Did 133000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (128 bytes) open operations in 1006441us (132148.8 ops/sec): 16.9 MB/s
Did 115000 AES-128-CBC-SHA1 (240 bytes) open operations in 1005246us (114399.9 ops/sec): 27.5 MB/s
Bug: 256
Change-Id: I864b4455ada0d4d245380fce6f869dabb0686354
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35167
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
bsaes_ctr32_encrypt_blocks previously fell back to the table-based
aes_nohw_encrypt for inputs under 128 bytes. Instead, just run the usual
bsaes code, though it means we compute more blocks than needed.
This fixes some (but not all) the timing leaks and is needed for later
bsaes work.
Performance-wise, x86_64 actually sees a performance improvement for all but
tiny inputs. ARM does see a loss at small inputs however.
Cortex-A53 (Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+)
Before:
Did 299000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1001123us (298664.6 ops/sec): 4.8 MB/s
Did 236000 AES-128-GCM (32 bytes) seal operations in 1001611us (235620.4 ops/sec): 7.5 MB/s
Did 167000 AES-128-GCM (64 bytes) seal operations in 1005706us (166052.5 ops/sec): 10.6 MB/s
Did 129000 AES-128-GCM (96 bytes) seal operations in 1006129us (128214.2 ops/sec): 12.3 MB/s
Did 116000 AES-128-GCM (112 bytes) seal operations in 1006302us (115273.5 ops/sec): 12.9 MB/s
Did 107000 AES-128-GCM (128 bytes) seal operations in 1000986us (106894.6 ops/sec): 13.7 MB/s
After:
Did 132000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1005165us (131321.7 ops/sec): 2.1 MB/s
Did 128000 AES-128-GCM (32 bytes) seal operations in 1005966us (127240.9 ops/sec): 4.1 MB/s
Did 120000 AES-128-GCM (64 bytes) seal operations in 1003080us (119631.5 ops/sec): 7.7 MB/s
Did 113000 AES-128-GCM (96 bytes) seal operations in 1000557us (112937.1 ops/sec): 10.8 MB/s
Did 110000 AES-128-GCM (112 bytes) seal operations in 1000407us (109955.2 ops/sec): 12.3 MB/s
Did 108000 AES-128-GCM (128 bytes) seal operations in 1008830us (107054.7 ops/sec): 13.7 MB/s
(Inputs 128 bytes and up are unaffected by this CL.)
Nexus 7
Before:
Did 544000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1001282us (543303.5 ops/sec): 8.7 MB/s
Did 475750 AES-128-GCM (32 bytes) seal operations in 1000244us (475633.9 ops/sec): 15.2 MB/s
Did 370500 AES-128-GCM (64 bytes) seal operations in 1000519us (370307.8 ops/sec): 23.7 MB/s
Did 300750 AES-128-GCM (96 bytes) seal operations in 1000122us (300713.3 ops/sec): 28.9 MB/s
Did 275750 AES-128-GCM (112 bytes) seal operations in 1000702us (275556.6 ops/sec): 30.9 MB/s
Did 251000 AES-128-GCM (128 bytes) seal operations in 1000214us (250946.3 ops/sec): 32.1 MB/s
After:
Did 296000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1001129us (295666.2 ops/sec): 4.7 MB/s
Did 288750 AES-128-GCM (32 bytes) seal operations in 1000488us (288609.2 ops/sec): 9.2 MB/s
Did 267250 AES-128-GCM (64 bytes) seal operations in 1000641us (267078.8 ops/sec): 17.1 MB/s
Did 253250 AES-128-GCM (96 bytes) seal operations in 1000915us (253018.5 ops/sec): 24.3 MB/s
Did 248000 AES-128-GCM (112 bytes) seal operations in 1000091us (247977.4 ops/sec): 27.8 MB/s
Did 249000 AES-128-GCM (128 bytes) seal operations in 1000794us (248802.5 ops/sec): 31.8 MB/s
Penryn (Mac mini, mid 2010)
Before:
Did 1331000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000263us (1330650.0 ops/sec): 21.3 MB/s
Did 991000 AES-128-GCM (32 bytes) seal operations in 1000274us (990728.5 ops/sec): 31.7 MB/s
Did 780000 AES-128-GCM (48 bytes) seal operations in 1000278us (779783.2 ops/sec): 37.4 MB/s
Did 483000 AES-128-GCM (96 bytes) seal operations in 1000137us (482933.8 ops/sec): 46.4 MB/s
Did 428000 AES-128-GCM (112 bytes) seal operations in 1001132us (427516.1 ops/sec): 47.9 MB/s
Did 682000 AES-128-GCM (128 bytes) seal operations in 1000564us (681615.6 ops/sec): 87.2 MB/s
After:
Did 953000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000385us (952633.2 ops/sec): 15.2 MB/s
Did 903000 AES-128-GCM (32 bytes) seal operations in 1000998us (902099.7 ops/sec): 28.9 MB/s
Did 850000 AES-128-GCM (48 bytes) seal operations in 1000938us (849203.4 ops/sec): 40.8 MB/s
Did 736000 AES-128-GCM (96 bytes) seal operations in 1000886us (735348.5 ops/sec): 70.6 MB/s
Did 702000 AES-128-GCM (112 bytes) seal operations in 1000657us (701539.1 ops/sec): 78.6 MB/s
Did 676000 AES-128-GCM (128 bytes) seal operations in 1000405us (675726.3 ops/sec): 86.5 MB/s
Bug: 256
Change-Id: I9403da607dd1feaff7b3c9b76fe78b66018fb753
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35166
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
glibc inlines bsearch, so CFI does observe the function pointer mishap.
Binary search is easy enough, aside from thinking through the edge case
at the end, so just implement it by hand. As a bonus, it actually gives
O(lg N) behavior.
sk_*_find needs to return the *first* match, while bsearch does not
promise a particular one. sk_find thus performs a fixup step to find the
first one, but this is linear in the number of matching elements.
Instead, the binary search should take this into account.
This still leaves qsort, but it's not inlined, so hopefully we can leave
it alone.
Bug: chromium:941463
Change-Id: I5c94d6b15423beea3bdb389639466f8b3ff0dc5d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35304
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
With all those structures made opaque, it's not really useful as a build
sanity-check anymore.
Update-Note: This function is removed, but I don't see any actual uses.
Change-Id: Ib5640e778466da980596e7085d97104d22aa9d33
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35184
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The AES-GCM-SIV code does not use ctr128_f at all so bsaes is simply
identical to aes_nohw. Also, while CCM encrypts with CTR mode, its MAC
is not parallelizable at all.
(Given the existence of non-parallelizable modes, we ought to make a
vpaes-armv7.pl to ensure constant-time AES on NEON. For now, pick the
right implementation for x86_64 at least.)
aes_ctr_set_key and friends probably aren't the right abstraction
(observe the large vs small inputs hint *almost* matches whether you
touch block128_f), but the right abstraction depends on a couple
questions:
- If you don't provide ctr128_f, is there a perf hit to implementing
ctr128_f on top of your block128_f to unify calling code?
- It is almost certainly better to use bsaes with gcm.c by calling
ctr128_f exclusively and paying some copies (a dedicated calling
convention would be even better, but would be a headache) to integrate
leading and trailing blocks into the CTR pass. Is this a win, loss, or
no-op for hwaes, where block128_f is just fine? hwaes is the one mode
we really should not regress.
Hopefully those will get answered as we continue to chip away at this.
Bug: 256
Change-Id: I8f0150b223b671e68f7da6faaff94a3bea398d4d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35169
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
OpenSSL's BN_mul function had a single-word buffer underflow (see
576129cd72ae054d246221f111aabf42b9c6d76d). We already independently
fixed this but, if we hadn't, ASan wouldn't have noticed because of
OPENSSL_malloc.
ASan has runtime hooks we can call to make it more accurate.
Change-Id: Ifc9c3837ece2bc456c5bdc960be707d7b1759904
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35165
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This imports ce5eb5e8149d8d03660575f4b8504c993851988a and
1212818eb07add297fe562eba80ac46a9893781e from OpenSSL's 1.1.1 branch.
Change-Id: I121c0771371697191a163a28d972a7b3cee37762
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35164
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This patches vpaes-armv8.pl to add vpaes_ctr32_encrypt_blocks. CTR mode
is by far the most important mode these days. It should have access to
_vpaes_encrypt_2x, which gives a considerable speed boost. Also exclude
vpaes_ecb_* as they're not even used.
For iOS, this change is completely a no-op. iOS ARMv8 always has crypto
extensions, and we already statically drop all other AES
implementations.
Android ARMv8 is *not* required to have crypto extensions, but every
ARMv8 device I've seen has them. For those, it is a no-op
performance-wise and a win on size. vpaes appears to be about 5.6KiB
smaller than the tables. ARMv8 always makes SIMD (NEON) available, so we
can statically drop aes_nohw.
In theory, however, crypto-less Android ARMv8 is possible. Today such
chips get a variable-time AES. This CL fixes this, but the performance
story is complex.
The Raspberry Pi 3 is not Android but has a Cortex-A53 chip
without crypto extensions. (But the official images are 32-bit, so even
this is slightly artificial...) There, vpaes is a performance win.
Raspberry Pi 3, Model B+, Cortex-A53
Before:
Did 265000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1003312us (264125.2 ops/sec): 4.2 MB/s
Did 44000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1002141us (43906.0 ops/sec): 11.2 MB/s
Did 9394 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1032104us (9101.8 ops/sec): 12.3 MB/s
Did 1562 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1008982us (1548.1 ops/sec): 12.7 MB/s
After:
Did 277000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1001884us (276479.1 ops/sec): 4.4 MB/s
Did 52000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1001480us (51923.2 ops/sec): 13.3 MB/s
Did 11000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1007979us (10912.9 ops/sec): 14.7 MB/s
Did 2013 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1085545us (1854.4 ops/sec): 15.2 MB/s
The Pixel 3 has a Cortex-A75 with crypto extensions, so it would never
run this code. However, artificially ignoring them gives another data
point (ARM documentation[*] suggests the extensions are still optional
on a Cortex-A75.) Sadly, vpaes no longer wins on perf over aes_nohw.
But, it is constant-time:
Pixel 3, AES/PMULL extensions ignored, Cortex-A75:
Before:
Did 2102000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000378us (2101205.7 ops/sec): 33.6 MB/s
Did 358000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1002658us (357051.0 ops/sec): 91.4 MB/s
Did 75000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1012830us (74049.9 ops/sec): 100.0 MB/s
Did 13000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1036524us (12541.9 ops/sec): 102.7 MB/s
After:
Did 1453000 AES-128-GCM (16 bytes) seal operations in 1000213us (1452690.6 ops/sec): 23.2 MB/s
Did 285000 AES-128-GCM (256 bytes) seal operations in 1002227us (284366.7 ops/sec): 72.8 MB/s
Did 60000 AES-128-GCM (1350 bytes) seal operations in 1016106us (59049.0 ops/sec): 79.7 MB/s
Did 11000 AES-128-GCM (8192 bytes) seal operations in 1094184us (10053.2 ops/sec): 82.4 MB/s
Note the numbers above run with PMULL off, so the slow GHASH is
dampening the regression. If we test aes_nohw and vpaes paired with
PMULL on, the 20% perf hit becomes a 31% hit. The PMULL-less variant is
more likely to represent a real chip.
This is consistent with upstream's note in the comment, though it is
unclear if 20% is the right order of magnitude: "these results are worse
than scalar compiler-generated code, but it's constant-time and
therefore preferred".
[*] http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.100458_0301_00_en/lau1442495529696.html
Bug: 246
Change-Id: If1dc87f5131fce742052498295476fbae4628dbf
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35026
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is done separately to make the diffs in the subsequent CL easier to
see. Imported from OpenSSL at revision
25ca718150cef41e1c1d9c2c8c58e2b1e2cad3fa.
Bug: 246
Change-Id: I9e7067ea177963fb9b77bf6fb39702ffe6e34ed4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35025
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The 64-bit version can be fairly straightforwardly translated.
Ironically, this makes 32-bit x86 the first architecture to meet the
goal of constant-time AES-GCM given SIMD assembly. (Though x86_64 could
join by simply giving up on bsaes...)
Bug: 263
Change-Id: Icb2cec936457fac7132bbb5dbb094433bc14b86e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/35024
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Change-Id: I1225f1623d4438a2ccaf482eddbe4f460cfaf78c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/35104
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
The test_support is kind of a mess right now because it's sometimes used in
GTest targets and sometimes not. It really should be split into two libraries,
but do this for now to unbreak the Android build.
Change-Id: I7cd2b0f6ed9eda1a529ec3c69a92390e20da66f8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/35084
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Since 34202b93b6 cert_cb is always called
before resumption is checked.
Change-Id: I27ca5653144027a1f545a90ecb6b68e64783a66a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/35004
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
The Android NDK docs link to a ARM GNU/Linux Application Binary Interface
Supplement document. Also fix a type in trampoline-armv4.pl. The generic ARM
document is usually shortened AAPCS, not APCS.
I couldn't find a corresponding link for aarch64.
Change-Id: I6e5543f5c9e26955cd3945e9e7a5dcff27c2bd78
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/35064
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
OpenSSL's c1669e1c205dc8e695fb0c10a655f434e758b9f7 switched it to
__ARM_MAX_ARCH__, which we mirrored in assembly but not C. The C version
should be __ARM_MAX_ARCH__ to match. However, __ARM_MAX_ARCH__ is
hardcoded to 8, so just remove the check.
Change-Id: Ic873203db1478f49437b889b84ee7fb28eba1a6d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/35045
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34188 accidentally disabled
it (__ARM_MAX_ARCH__ wasn't defined), which, in turn, masked a bug in
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34874.
Remove the __ARM_MAX_ARCH__ check as that's hardcoded to 8 anyway. Then
revert the problematic part of the bsaes-armv7.pl change. That brings
back the somewhat questionable post-dispatch to pre-dispatch call, but I
hope to patch the fallbacks out soon anyway.
Change-Id: I567e55fe35cb716d5ed56580113a302617f5ad71
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/35044
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
bsaes, in its current incarnation, hits various pathological behaviors
at different input sizes. Make it easy to experiment around them.
Bug: 256
Change-Id: Ib6c6ca7d06a570dbf7d4d2ea81c1db0d94d3d0c4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34876
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
GCC notices that one function believes < 0 is the error while the other
believes it's != 0. unw_get_reg never returns positive, but match them.
Change-Id: I40af614e6b1400bf3d398bd32beb6d3ec702bc11
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34985
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The ImplDispatchTest was broken because the 64-bit VPAES code wasn't
setting the hit flags.
Change-Id: I30200db64337deba7ae9d70d8427decbdfceca58
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34986
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This makes the AES_* functions meet our constant-time goals for
platforms where we have vpaes available. In particular, QUIC packet
number encryption needs single-block operations and those should have
vpaes available.
As a bonus, when vpaes is statically available, the aes_nohw_* functions
should be dropped by the linker. (Notably, NEON is guaranteed on
aarch64. Although vpaes-armv8.pl itself may take some more exploration.
https://crbug.com/boringssl/246#c4)
Bug: 263
Change-Id: Ie1c4727a166ec101a8453761757c87dadc188769
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34875
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
In particular, consistently pair bsaes with aes_nohw.
Ideally the aes_nohw_* calls in bsaes-*.pl would be patched out and
bsaes grows its own constant-time key setup
(https://crbug.com/boringssl/256), but I'll sort that out separately. In
the meantime, avoid going through AES_* which now dispatch. This avoids
several nuisances:
1. If we were to add, say, a vpaes-armv7.pl the ABI tests would break.
Fundamentally, we cannot assume that an AES_KEY has one and only one
representation and must keep everything matching up.
2. AES_* functions should enable vpaes. This makes AES_* faster and
constant-time for vector-capable CPUs
(https://crbug.com/boringssl/263), relevant for QUIC packet number
encryption, allowing us to add vpaes-armv8.pl
(https://crbug.com/boringssl/246) without carrying a (likely) mostly
unused AES implementation.
3. It's silly to double-dispatch when the EVP layer has already
dispatched.
4. We should avoid asm calling into C. Otherwise, we need to test asm
for ABI compliance as both caller and callee. Currently we only test
it for callee compliance. When asm calls into asm, it *should* comply
with the ABI as caller too, but mistakes don't matter as long as the
called function triggers it. If the function is asm, this is fixed.
If it is C, we must care about arbitrary C compiler output.
Bug: 263
Change-Id: Ic85af5c765fd57cbffeaf301c3872bad6c5bbf78
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34874
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We need these APIs to parse some Certificate Transparency structures.
Bug: chromium:634570
Change-Id: I4eb46058985a7369dc119ba6a1214913b237da39
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34944
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Unfortunately, it's not enough to be able to turn it on thanks to the
PURE_VIRTUAL macro. But it gets us most of the way there.
Change-Id: Ie6ad5119fcfd420115fa49d7312f3586890244f4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34949
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Change-Id: If5d88d88bd1ea8189cc715cc38e70bd3b11c4b67
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34950
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Go 1.12 really wants to record a version in go.mod if there is no
version in there. 1.12 is not yet released, so stick 1.11 in there for
now. We'll bump it to 1.12 and so on as we update our minimum versions.
Change-Id: I79ac85837149ab7cadd2f23acd8ab2d207a1a355
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34924
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
STRICT_ALIGNMENT is a remnant of OpenSSL code would cast pointers to
size_t* and load more than one byte at a time. Not all architectures
support unaligned access, so it did an alignment check and only enterred
this path if aligned or the underlying architecture didn't care.
This is UB. Unaligned casts in C are undefined on all architectures, so
we switch these to memcpy some time ago. Compilers can optimize memcpy
to the unaligned accesses we wanted. That left our modes logic as:
- If STRICT_ALIGNMENT is 1 and things are unaligned, work byte-by-byte.
- Otherwise, use the memcpy-based word-by-word code, which now works
independent of STRICT_ALIGNMENT.
Remove the first check to simplify things. On x86, x86_64, and aarch64,
STRICT_ALIGNMENT is zero and this is a no-op. ARM is more complex. Per
[0], ARMv7 and up support unaligned access. ARMv5 do not. ARMv6 does,
but can run in a mode where it looks more like ARMv5.
For ARMv7 and up, STRICT_ALIGNMENT should have been zero, but was one.
Thus this change should be an improvement for ARMv7 (right now unaligned
inputs lose bsaes-armv7). The Android NDK does not even support the
pre-ARMv7 ABI anymore[1]. Nonetheless, Cronet still supports ARMv6 as a
library. It builds with -march=armv6 which GCC interprets as supporting
unaligned access, so it too did not want this code.
For completeness, should anyone still care about ARMv5 or be building
with an overly permissive -march flag, GCC does appear unable to inline
the memcpy calls. However, GCC also does not interpret
(uintptr_t)ptr % sizeof(size_t) as an alignment assertion, so such
consumers have already been paying for the memcpy here and throughout
the library.
In general, C's arcane pointer rules mean we must resort to memcpy
often, so, realistically, we must require that the compiler optimize
memcpy well.
[0] https://medium.com/@iLevex/the-curious-case-of-unaligned-access-on-arm-5dd0ebe24965
[1] https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/abis#armeabi
Change-Id: I3c7dea562adaeb663032e395499e69530dd8e145
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34873
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Independent of the underlying CPU architecture, casting unaligned
pointers to uint64_t* is undefined. Just use a memcpy. The compiler
should be able to optimize that itself.
Change-Id: I39210871fca3eaf1f4b1d205b2bb0c337116d9cc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/34872
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
