The fallback functions still themselves leak, but I've left TODOs there.
This only affects BN_mod_mul_montgomery on platforms where we don't use
the bn_mul_mont assembly, but BN_mul additionally affects the final
multiplication in RSA CRT.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: Ia1ae16162c38e10c056b76d6b2afbed67f1a5e16
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25260
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>
Functions that deserialize from bytes and Montgomery multiplication have
no reason to minimize their inputs.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: I121cc9b388033d684057b9df4ad0c08364849f58
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25258
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>
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>
These empty states aren't any use to either caller or implementor.
Change-Id: If0b748afeeb79e4a1386182e61c5b5ecf838de62
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25254
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Saves a bit of work, and we get a width sanity-check.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: I1c6bc376c9d8aaf60a078fdc39f35b6f44a688c6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25251
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>
These functions already require their inputs to be reduced mod N (or, in
some cases, bounded by R or N*R), so negative numbers are nonsense. The
code still attempted to account for them by working on the absolute
value and fiddling with the sign bit. (The output would be in range (-N,
N) instead of [0, N).)
This complicates relaxing bn_correct_top because bn_correct_top is also
used to prevent storing a negative zero. Instead, just reject negative
inputs.
Upgrade-Note: These functions are public API, so some callers may
notice. Code search suggests there is only one caller outside
BoringSSL, and it looks fine.
Bug: 232
Change-Id: Ieba3acbb36b0ff6b72b8ed2b14882ec9b88e4665
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25249
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This matches bn_mod_mul_montgomery_small and removes a bit of
unnecessary stuttering.
Change-Id: Ife249c6e8754aef23c144dbfdea5daaf7ed9f48a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25248
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This cuts down on a duplicated place where we mess with bn->top. It also
also better abstracts away what determines the value of R.
(I ordered this wrong and rebasing will be annoying. Specifically, the
question is what happens if the modulus is non-minimal. In
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/25250/, R will
be determined by the stored width of mont->N, so we want to use mont's
copy of the modulus. Though, one way or another, the important part is
that it's inside the Montgomery abstraction.)
Bug: 232
Change-Id: I74212e094c8a47f396b87982039e49048a130916
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/25247
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
These use the square and multiply functions added earlier.
Change-Id: I723834f9a227a9983b752504a2d7ce0223c43d24
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/23070
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
bn_from_montgomery_in_place is actually constant-time. It is, of course,
only used by non-constant-time BIGNUM callers, but that will soon be
fixed.
Change-Id: I2b2c9943dc3b8d6a4b5b19a5bc4fa9ebad532bac
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/23069
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
BN_from_montgomery_word doesn't have a constant memory access pattern.
Replace the pointer trick with constant_time_select_w. There is, of
course, still the bn_correct_top leak pervasive in BIGNUM itself.
I wasn't able to measure a performance on RSA operations before or after
this change, but the benchmarks would vary wildly run to run. But one
would assume the logic here is nothing compared to the actual reduction.
Change-Id: Ide761fde3a091a93679f0a803a287aa5d0d4600d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/22904
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Change-Id: I482093000ee2e4ba371c78b4f7f8e8b121e71640
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/22886
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is an OpenSSL thing to support platforms where BN_ULONG is not
actually the size it claims to be. We define BN_ULONG to uint32_t and
uint64_t which are guaranteed by C to implement arithemetic modulo 2^32
and 2^64, respectively. Thus there is no need for any of this.
Change-Id: I098cd4cc050a136b9f2c091dfbc28dd83e01f531
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/21784
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>
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>
