NIST 更新了 SHA-1 的淘汰計畫

NISTSHA-1 的新的淘汰計畫出來了:「NIST Retires SHA-1 Cryptographic Algorithm」。

先前 NIST 在 2004 年時是計畫在 2010 年淘汰掉 SHA-1,在「NIST Brief Comments on Recent Cryptanalytic Attacks on Secure Hashing Functions and the Continued Security Provided by SHA-1」這邊可以看到當時的宣佈:

The results presented so far on SHA-1 do not call its security into question. However, due to advances in technology, NIST plans to phase out of SHA-1 in favor of the larger and stronger hash functions (SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384 and SHA-512) by 2010.

但看起來當時沒有強制性,所以事情就是一直拖一直延期,中間經過了 2017 年 GoogleCWI Amsterdam 展示的 SHA-1 collision:「Google 與 CWI Amsterdam 合作,找到 SHA-1 第一個 collision」。

以及 2020 年時的進展與分析,發現 chosen-prefix collision 已經是可行等級了:「SHA-1 的 chosen-prefix collision 低於 2^64 了...」。

然後 NIST 總算是想起來要更新 phase out 的計畫,現在最新的計畫是在 2030 年年底淘汰掉 SHA-1:

As today’s increasingly powerful computers are able to attack the algorithm, NIST is announcing that SHA-1 should be phased out by Dec. 31, 2030, in favor of the more secure SHA-2 and SHA-3 groups of algorithms.


“Modules that still use SHA-1 after 2030 will not be permitted for purchase by the federal government,” Celi said.

但 2030 年聽起來還是有點慢...

Post-Quantum 的 KEM,SIDH/SIKE 確認死亡

似乎是這幾天 cryptography 領域裡面頗熱鬧的消息,SIDH 以及 SIKE 確認有嚴重的問題:「SIKE Broken」,論文在「An efficient key recovery attack on SIDH (preliminary version)」這邊可以取得。

這次的成果是 Key recovery attack,算是最暴力的幹法,直接把 key 解出來。

另外 SIKE 剛好也是先前 Cloudflare 在解釋 Hertzbleed 時被拿來打的目標:「Cloudflare 上的 Hertzbleed 解釋」,這樣看起來連 patch 也都不用繼續研究了...

論文裡面的攻擊對象中,第一個是 Microsoft$IKE challenges 內所定義的 $IKEp182 與 $IKEp217,在只用 single core 的情況下,分別在四分鐘與六分鐘就解出來:

Ran on a single core, the appended Magma code breaks the Microsoft SIKE challenges $IKEp182 and $IKEp217 in about 4 minutes and 6 minutes, respectively.

接著是四個參與 NIST 標準選拔的參數,分別是 SIKEp434、SIKEp503、SIKEp610 以及 SIKEp751,也都被極短的時間解出來:

A run on the SIKEp434 parameters, previously believed to meet NIST’s quantum security level 1, took about 62 minutes, again on a single core.

We also ran the code on random instances of SIKEp503 (level 2), SIKEp610 (level 3) and SIKEp751 (level 5), which took about 2h19m, 8h15m and 20h37m, respectively.

Ars Technica 的採訪「Post-quantum encryption contender is taken out by single-core PC and 1 hour」裡面,有問到 SIKE 的共同發明人 David Jao 的看法,他主要是認為密碼學界的人對於數學界的「武器」了解程度不夠而導致這次的情況:

It's true that the attack uses mathematics which was published in the 1990s and 2000s. In a sense, the attack doesn't require new mathematics; it could have been noticed at any time. One unexpected facet of the attack is that it uses genus 2 curves to attack elliptic curves (which are genus 1 curves). A connection between the two types of curves is quite unexpected. To give an example illustrating what I mean, for decades people have been trying to attack regular elliptic curve cryptography, including some who have tried using approaches based on genus 2 curves. None of these attempts has succeeded. So for this attempt to succeed in the realm of isogenies is an unexpected development.

In general there is a lot of deep mathematics which has been published in the mathematical literature but which is not well understood by cryptographers. I lump myself into the category of those many researchers who work in cryptography but do not understand as much mathematics as we really should. So sometimes all it takes is someone who recognizes the applicability of existing theoretical math to these new cryptosystems. That is what happened here.


Decompile to C 的工具

昨天在 Hacker News 上看到「Decompiler Explorer (」這篇,裡面列出了很多 Decompile to C 的工具 (就不用直接硬看 assembly),包括了 open source 與商用軟體:


NIST 選出了四個 Post-Quantum Cryptography 演算法

NIST (NSA) 選出了四個 Post-quantum cryptography 演算法 (可以抵抗量子電腦的演算法):「NIST Announces First Four Quantum-Resistant Cryptographic Algorithms」。


  • CRYSTALS-Kyber:非對稱加密。
  • CRYSTALS-Dilithium:數位簽名。
  • FALCON:數位簽名。
  • SPHINCS+:數位簽名。


然後翻了 Hacker News 上的討論,果然一堆人在討論 NIST 能不能信任的問題:「NIST Announces First Four Quantum-Resistant Cryptographic Algorithms (」。

然後據說 Kyber 這個名字出自 Star Wars,Dilithium 這個名字則是出自 Star Trek,這還真公平 XDDD

GCP 推出 Cloud HSM (beta)

這算是 Google Cloud Platform 在補產品線,讓那些有強制使用 HSM 的需求的應用 (通常是遇到一定要 FIPS 140-2 的規範) 可以搬上雲端:「Introducing Cloud HSM beta for hardware crypto key security」。

從圖片上可以看到 LiquidSecurity,應該是「LiquidSecurity® General Purpose HSM Adapters and Appliances」這個產品:

如同 AWSCloudHSM 服務,GCP 的 Cloud HSM 也是提供 FIPS 140-2 Level 3:

Cloud HSM allows you to host encryption keys and perform cryptographic operations in FIPS 140-2 Level 3 certified HSMs (shown below).

演算法上,支援 AESRSAECC (NIST 的 P-256 與 P-384):

In addition to symmetric key encryption using AES-256 keys, you can now create various types of asymmetric keys for decryption or signing operations, which means that you can now store your keys used for PKI or code signing in a Google Cloud managed keystore. Specifically, RSA 2048, RSA 3072, RSA 4096, EC P256, and EC P384 keys will be available for signing operations, while RSA 2048, RSA 3072, and RSA 4096 keys will also have the ability to decrypt blocks of data.

目前只支援 us-east1us-west1,另外價錢也比軟體服務版本的 Cloud KMS 貴不少:

Billable item For keys with protection level SOFTWARE For keys with protection level HSM
Active AES-256 and RSA 2048 key versions $0.06 per month $1.00 per month
Active RSA 3072, RSA 4096 or Elliptic Curve key versions $0.06 per month $2.50 per month for the first 2,000
$1.00 per month thereafter
Destroyed key versions Free Free
Key operations: Cryptographic $0.03 per 10,000 operations $0.03 per 10,000 operations for AES-256 and RSA 2048 keys
$0.15 per 10,000 operations for RSA 3072, RSA 4096, and Elliptic Curve keys
Key operations: Admin Free Free

不過一般情況應該不會得用 CloudHSM,先有個印象就好...

CA/Browser Forum 上的會議記錄:關於密碼與 2FA 的強制要求

CA/Browser Forum 會定時將會議記錄與最後的結論公開放在網站上,有時候有些資訊還蠻有趣的。像是前幾天在「Ballot 221 - Two-Factor Authentication and Password Improvements - CAB Forum」這邊看到 CA/Browser Forum 的成員對密碼與 2FA 提出了修正提案,其中瀏覽器端只有 Microsoft 參與投票,但是被否決了...


第一個是提案提到了 NSANIST 800-63B Appendix A,這個單位不太受歡迎啊...

第二個則是「For accounts that are accessible only within Secure Zones or High Security Zones, require that passwords have at least twelve (12) characters;」這段強迫使用密碼,而現在有比密碼更安全的方案存在 (以 public key cryptography 為認證基礎的方案),像是早期的 U2F 以及今年定案的 WebAuthn


TLS 1.3 進入 Proposed Standard

最近蠻熱的一個新聞,TLS 1.3 的 draft-ietf-tls-tls13-28.txt 進入 Proposed Standard 了 (在「draft-ietf-tls-tls13-28 - The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3」這邊可以看到歷史記錄):「Protocol Action: 'The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-tls-tls13-28.txt)」。

沒意外的話這就會是最終版本了。如果要看 TLS 1.2 與 TLS 1.3 的差異,看維基百科上的 Transport Layer Security - TLS 1.3 會比較清楚。

大家等很久了... 像是 OpenSSL 1.1.1 其實一部分也是在等 TLS 1.3 正式推出:(出自「Using TLS1.3 With OpenSSL」)

OpenSSL 1.1.1 will not be released until (at least) TLSv1.3 is finalised. In the meantime the OpenSSL git master branch contains our development TLSv1.3 code which can be used for testing purposes (i.e. it is not for production use).

主要還是期待非 NSA 派系的 cipher (其實幾乎都是 djb 的戰果) 與 1-RTT handshake,後續等 TLS 1.3 變成 Standard Track 應該就會被各家瀏覽器開預設值了...

以色列黑了 Kaspersky 的系統,然後通報美國機密資料外洩...

前幾天在「俄羅斯政府透過卡巴斯基的漏洞,偷取美國國安局的文件」這邊提到了俄羅斯是透過 Kaspersky 的漏洞取得,後續又有些消息揭露出來了...

這件事情會被抓包,是因為以色列黑進去 Kaspersky 的系統 (???),然後發現美國的機密資料外洩 (??????),於是通報盟友美國後追查出來的 (?????????):「Israel hacked Kaspersky, then tipped the NSA that its tools had been breached」。

這過程是殺小 XDDD


這下知道為什麼美國政府要直接禁用 Kaspersky 了:「Russian Hackers Stole NSA Data on U.S. Cyber Defense」。如果看不到 WSJ 的文章,可以看「Russia reportedly stole NSA secrets with help of Kaspersky—what we know now」這邊。

最近的事件被發現與 Kaspersky 的漏洞有關:

The hackers appear to have targeted the contractor after identifying the files through the contractor’s use of a popular antivirus software made by Russia-based Kaspersky Lab, these people said.

加上 Kaspersky 有濃厚的俄羅斯官方色彩 (關係良好),以及法令上與技術上都有可能性要求 Kaspersky 協助。雖然這次事件是合約工家裡電腦用 Kaspersky 造成的,但已經有足夠的風險讓美國政府決定開鍘下令完全禁用了:

For years, U.S. national security officials have suspected that Kaspersky Lab, founded by a computer scientist who was trained at a KGB-sponsored technical school, is a proxy of the Russian government, which under Russian law can compel the company’s assistance in intercepting communications as they move through Russian computer networks.


透過 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 取得的資料顯示美國政府 (包括了五角大廈、CIA、NSA) 如何介入好萊塢,影響大眾對於戰爭的看法:「EXCLUSIVE: Documents expose how Hollywood promotes war on behalf of the Pentagon, CIA and NSA」。

灰標「US military intelligence agencies have influenced over 1,800 movies and TV shows」可以看出影響的層面。

The documents reveal for the first time the vast scale of US government control in Hollywood, including the ability to manipulate scripts or even prevent films too critical of the Pentagon from being made — not to mention influencing some of the most popular film franchises in recent years.

從很意想不到的地方介入... 引用其中一個說明:

Jon Voight in Transformers — in this scene, just after American troops have been attacked by a Decepticon robot, Pentagon Hollywood liaison Phil Strub inserted the line ‘Bring em home’, granting the military a protective, paternalistic quality, when in reality the DOD does quite the opposite.