Hi,
i wanted to ask if the hardware accelerators and TRNG of the Hardware
Security Engine (HSE) of NXP S32K3XX microcontrollers are supported by the
mbedTLS Library ? because i can't find it in the "MBEDTLS HARDWARE
CRYPTOGRAPHY SUPPORT" list.
Best regards,
Ben
+ Mbed TLS mailing list for visibility…
Regards,
Shebu
From: Rehan Malak via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2023 9:44 AM
To: Antonio De Angelis <Antonio.DeAngelis(a)arm.com>; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: mbedtls_platform_setup/teardown in TF-M ?
Hi Antonio,
Thanks a lot for your answer !
Looking at the MbedTLS github link you sent (and the one therein)
- https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6228 PSA: separate driver initialization with a nicer fixed ordering
- https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6007 Define the PSA subsystem initialization interface in Mbed TLS
it seems that for the best would be indeed to provide feedback to the MbedTLS/PSA team such that TF-M could just run the adequate psa_* functions.
Thanks !
Rehan
Intrinsic ID
________________________________
From: Antonio De Angelis <Antonio.DeAngelis(a)arm.com<mailto:Antonio.DeAngelis@arm.com>>
Sent: Saturday, July 8, 2023 12:13 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>; Rehan Malak <Rehan.Malak(a)intrinsic-id.com<mailto:Rehan.Malak@intrinsic-id.com>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: mbedtls_platform_setup/teardown in TF-M ?
Hi Rehan,
This looks like a non-PSA standardized feature specific to mbed TLS. We don't have any platform in TF-M that requires such setup/teardown so I can't comment from experience, but to me it looks like this would be an mbed TLS specific feature that needs to be hooked underneath the service and into the library. The most natural choice would be indeed to have them as part of the psa_crypto_init() and lower functions, but at this stage I think is not possible to implement this without patching the source code (i.e. there are no options to allow this at build time in TF-M, at least).
Note also that mbed TLS has a on open ongoing issue to better define the initialisation sequence for the various operations in psa_crypto_init(): PSA: separate driver initialization with a nicer fixed ordering · Issue #6228 · Mbed-TLS/mbedtls (github.com)<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6228> It might be a good place to start to provide feedback regarding this particular aspect of custom platform initialisation if is not being considered there.
To conclude, if you want to propose a patch for TF-M to allow such functions to be plugged in (in the meantime that mbed TLS agrees on the long term course of action), I will be happy to review it.
Thanks,
Antonio
________________________________
From: Rehan Malak via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2023 13:15
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org> <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
Subject: [TF-M] mbedtls_platform_setup/teardown in TF-M ?
Dear TF-M developers,
I am currently adapting a basic MbedTLS / PSA Crypto example such that it would run on the NS side with TF-M doing the crypto.
At the end, this is very similar to this psa_sign_verify_message_test from the NS crypto test suite :
https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/tf-m-tests.git/tree/test/secure_fw/sui…
But my build config of MbedTLS has MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_SETUP_TEARDOWN_ALT enabled because I have a custom mbedtls_platform_setup / mbedtls_platform_teardown.
And I can't see any place in TF-M where mbedtls_platform_setup/mbedtls_platform_teardown are called :
? -> mbedtls_platform_setup
? -> mbedtls_platform_teardown
At first, I tried to put this code into the psa_driver_wrapper_init/psa_driver_wrapper_free but I have a similar problem :
tfm_crypto_engine_init -> psa_crypto_init -> psa_driver_wrapper_init
? -> mbedtls_psa_crypto_free -> psa_driver_wrapper_free
Is there any cmake/Kconfig option or any C macros to hook TF-M initialization/shutdown with mbedtls_platform_setup/mbedtls_platform_teardown without patching TF-M ?
If not, could mbedtls_platform_setup be called here ? https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-M/trusted-firmware-m.git/tree/secure_fw/…
or is there a nicer way of doing this ?
(btw, I am currently experimenting on qemu mps2-an521)
Thanks for any advice ! 🙂
Best regards,
Rehan MALAK
Intrinsic ID
Hello,
This is a question for integrators and packagers of Mbed TLS, especially
if you're integrating the library in some embedded OS or BSP.
To build, configure and test Mbed TLS, we use Python for several purposes:
* To configure the library with scripts/config.py, unless you use the
default configuration or write your own configuration from scratch.
* To generate some configuration-independent library source files, but
only if you use the development branch, not if you use a release or
an LTS branch.
* To generate some glue code for PSA drivers, if you use PSA drivers
and don't write the glue code by hand.
* To generate the unit test source files.
* (We have many more maintenance and test scripts but they're out of
scope here.)
(Python is not necessary, and will remain unnecessary, to configure and
build the library with a given set of hardware drivers, so that a
typical BSP will not have to depend on Python.)
For each of these purposes, how problematic is it if we require a recent
version of Python? We're currently planning to drop support for older
versions of Python as soon as they become unsupported upstream (so
officially dropping 3.8 now — although right now all scripts still work
on 3.5). This includes versions of Python that are still shipped in e.g.
Linux distributions that are themselves officially supported. Is there
demand for supporting older Python versions for some scripts?
Also, how problematic is it if some of these purposes require
third-party Python packages?
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
FYI to all TF dev teams leveraging Open CI.
Best regards,
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Glen Valante via Tf-openci-triage <
tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 at 08:41
Subject: [Tf-openci-triage] FYI; Cambridge Lab Down
To: tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <
tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Hello All;
FYI; the Cambridge lab took a serious power hit and is down. They are
scrambling to get things back up, but it may take all weekend.
Expect LAVA failures and other strange results.
Thanks;
-g
--
[image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org>
Glen Valante | *Director Program & Project Management*
T: +1.508.517.3461 <1617-320-5000>
glen.valante(a)linaro.org | Skype: gvalante <callto:gvalante>
--
Tf-openci-triage mailing list -- tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
tf-openci-triage-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Dear sir/madam,
Hope you are doing good!
We are working on a lightweight TLS implementation for embedded hardware
and want to add our own algorithm inside mbedTLS. As per my knowledge, we
have to add a .h file in mbedtls/include/mbedtls and .c file in the
library. Also, we have to list our algorithm in library/CMakeLists.txt.
Except these, what should be the procedure?
Also, our task is during handshake, the receiver chooses our algorithm
instead of the default one for encryption and decryption. If someone could
help us regarding this then it would be great.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
--
*Dr. Vishal J. Rathod*
*(Member - IEEE, ACM, IET)*
*Senior Project Engineer (SPE),*
*IoT R & D Group,*
*C-DAC, Electronic City,*
*Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.*
*Email ID: rathodvishal78(a)gmail.com <rathodvishal78(a)gmail.com> and *
vishalrathod(a)ieee.org
*Mobile - 9879957770*
Hi!
I am a new MbedTLS user and would like to say thanks to devs first!
From my point of view mbedtls_net_connect() could handle binding socket to a specified local client port.
Although it does not seem to be a common requirement and bloats API a little bit but otherwise user has to throw away mbedtls_net_connect()
and implement connection function by their hands.
Best,
Alex
Hi Ruchika,
as an addition to the previous answers, there is also the SecureMark-TLS benchmark from EEMBC that "Analyzes the costs associated with implementing TLS on an edge device using a common IoT cyphersuite comprised of ECC & ECDSA on the NIST secp256r1 curve, SHA256, and AES128-CCM/ECB", see: https://www.eembc.org/securemark/
It provides profiles to run benchmarks against Mbed TLS API, PSA Crypto API, and wolfSSL, see sources here: https://github.com/eembc/securemark-tls/tree/main/examples/selfhosted/profi…
The chosen cipher-suite is similar to the TF-M medium profile and it allows estimates of speed and power consumption for TLS on microcontrollers. It also allows to add - manually - footprint data.
Best
Stephan
From: Ruchika Gupta via psa-crypto <psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta_1(a)nxp.com>
Date: Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 13:40
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>, "psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [psa-crypto] Benchmark application for PSA crypto API's
Hi,
For mbedtls API’s, there is a benchmark application available. Are there any plans to implement benchmark application for PSA crypto APIs ?
Regards,
Ruchika
Hi,
For mbedtls API's, there is a benchmark application available. Are there any plans to implement benchmark application for PSA crypto APIs ?
Regards,
Ruchika
Hello,
In mbedLS v3.4.0, I came across a build error that there are no members for type and flag in psa_core_keyattributes_t structure.
The following functions in psa_crypto_core.h access private members type and flag of psa_core_keyattributes_t structure without the MBEDTLS_PRIBATE() private access.
* psa_is_key_slot_occupied()
* psa_key_slot_get_flags()
* psa_key_slot_set_flags()
* psa_key_slot_set_bits_in_flags()
* psa_key_slot_clear_bits()
Updating to private access for attribute struct members in psa_crypto_core.h fixed the build errors.
Regards,
Archanaa
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
This event has been canceled with a note:
"Cancelled due to Bank Holiday"
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Monday May 8, 2023 ⋅ 8:30am – 9:30am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
nnac123(a)gmail.com
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hello,
To strengthen Mbed TLS against accidental misuse, we're going to enforce
a minimum size for RSA key generation. Currently the minimum is 128
bits, just to avoid some edge cases in the implementation. So for
example, if you want a 2048-bit key but accidentally pass a number of
bytes, the library will happily generate a 256-bit key. We want to
prevent this scenario.
What should the minimum be? If we make the minimum 2048 bits, will this
be a problem? We will not make the minimum any higher. But we're
considering enforcing only a minimum 1024 bits, which is over the record
from public breaks and largely resolves the risk of bits/bytes confusion.
Should we also enforce a minimum (perhaps lower) in the 2.28 long-time
support branch?
If you're using Mbed TLS to generate small RSA keys, please let us know
on the mailing list, on GitHub at
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/7556, or by private email.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Every 4 weeks from 9:30am to 10:30am on Monday
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
nnac123(a)gmail.com
View all guest info
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=ZGExMnNqcDB1MDFm…
Reply for mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and view more details
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=ZGExMnNqcDB1MDFm…
Your attendance is optional.
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hello,
using mbed TLS pavkaged with esp32 toolchain, for doing eap-tls with server certificate verification using CA cert.
Mbed TLS rejects certificate in mbedtls_x509_crt_check_key_usage (x509_crt.c), because usage_may variable is 0.
usage is set by mbedtls_ssl_check_cert_usage (ssl_tls.c) to MBEDTLS_X509_KU_DIGITAL_SIGNATURE because my keys are ECDHE-ECDSA.
Is this the expected behaviour ?
Thanks in advance
François
Hello,
I was working on packaging up mbedtls for [tea, a new package manager](https://tea.xyz/) and ran into an error validating the built products. I was hoping maybe someone more knowledgeable could take a quick look.
I followed the homebrew formula here: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/af8e7e97432944a65c0f985132a7…
Here's the PR for adding it to tea: https://github.com/teaxyz/pantry/pull/1822
For some reason I'm not getting the expected checksum from `generic_sum`. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!
-Joe
Hi Team,
I want to implement TLS over UART using MbedTLS library, But the issue i am facing right now is There are no example codes or any reference document for briefing how to import the libraries and what changes should be done to do so.
I tried to use some examples for Lwip examples but i am getting errors while importing library like platform error, timing_alt.h error.
Please help me out in urgent.
Thanks !!
I have created an http server following the example for server1 under FreeRTOS and Lwip running on a STM32H753 using the Stm32CubeIDE. Everything seem to work correctly, however, I am experiencing a small memory leak over each successive TLS connection of 160 bytes. It is obvious that I must not be freeing a context, but as I am following the example very closely, except for running the code in a FreeRTOS thread, I must be missing something fundemental. Has anyone on this list experienced a similar issue or have any ideas on how to debug it?
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next Monday at 10:00am PM UK time. Invite details can be found on
the online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi
What's the best way to shutdown a network connection for when say an embedded device is shutting down or going to reboot?
I have the following code I call when I am going to kick off a reboot:
LOG_DEBUG("Network Manager: Ethernet is going down%s", networkManager->rebootInProgress ? "..." : " for reconfiguration...");
netifapi_dhcp_release_and_stop(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
netifapi_netif_set_link_down(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
netifapi_netif_set_down(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
networkManager->ethernetLinkUp = false;
if (networkManager->rebootInProgress)
{
netifapi_netif_remove(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
}
The trouble is that the link seems to come back up again as soon as it goes down and my state machine starts doing stuff like kicking off a new DHCP request etc, right about the time the hardware reboots.
I added in the call to netifapi_netif_remove() quite recently but it doesn't seem to make any difference.
I could put some more code in my link status state machine for an impending reboot, but this seems more complicated than it probably needs to be, as I'm probably not doing something I should be.
Gary Metalle
Senior Embedded Software Engineer
Hello,
What is the extent of PSA Crypto API 1.1 support available in mbedTLS today?
From the road map, API v1.0 is supported. I also see that PBKDF, which is in PSA API v1.1, is in development.
Regards,
Archanaa
This event has been canceled with a note:
"Bank Holiday - Cancelling "
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Monday Apr 10, 2023 ⋅ 8:30am – 9:30am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
nnac123(a)gmail.com
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi Mbed TLS users,
We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.4.0 and 2.28.3
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and bring other minor changes. Full details are available in the release notes.
(https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.4.0, https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.3).
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
The Mbed TLS team
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
hello,
I am currently evaluating if latest mbed-TLS release does support following algorithms:
- ECDSA using secp521r1 curve
- EDDSA using Edwards curves 448 or 448-Goldilocks
- ECDH using mentioned curves
- SHA512
- SHAKE256
For some of them like SHA512 I found information in the documentation. Others like EDDSA and SHAKE256 seem to be incomplete. Is my assumption correct that TLS 1.3 is therefore NOT ready to use yet?
Best regards,
Chris
Hello everyone,
We are currently using the mbedTLS version 2.16.12 in our firmware and we are planning an update to a newer branch. I would like to know, how long the different 3.x branches will be supported.
Is there any fix roadmap, how long an mbedTLS branch must be supported and maintained after its first release? I could only find this information for the 2.28 branch (support until end of 2024).
Thank you for any help you can offer.
Best regards
Maher Azarkan
Hilscher Gesellschaft f?r Systemautomation mbH
Rheinstra?e 15 / D-65795 Hattersheim / Germany
Sitz der Gesellschaft / place of business: Hattersheim | Gesch?ftsf?hrer / managing director: Sebastian Hilscher, Hans-J?rgen Hilscher
Handelsregister / commercial register: Frankfurt B 26873 | Ust. Idnr. / VAT No.: DE113852715 Registergericht / register court: Amtsgericht Frankfurt/Main
Important Information:
This e-mail message including its attachments contains confidential and legally protected information solely intended for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please contact the addresser immediately and delete this message including its attachments. The unauthorized dissemination, copying and change of this e-mail are strictly forbidden. The addresser shall not be liable for the content of such changed e-mails.
Wichtiger Hinweis:
Diese E-Mail einschlie?lich ihrer Anh?nge enth?lt vertrauliche und rechtlich gesch?tzte Informationen, die nur f?r den Adressaten bestimmt sind. Sollten Sie nicht der bezeichnete Adressat sein, so teilen Sie dies bitte dem Absender umgehend mit und l?schen Sie diese Nachricht und ihre Anh?nge. Die unbefugte Weitergabe, das Anfertigen von Kopien und jede Ver?nderung der E-Mail ist untersagt. Der Absender haftet nicht f?r Inhalte von ver?nderten E-Mails.
Dear all,
I need to migrate from OpenSSL to MbedTLS.
I have to implement a SCEP client in my embedded environment composed by FreeRTOS as OS, mbedTLS as security layer and LwIP as network stack.
The best candidate for the SCEP client role is the sscep library. It works very well under Ubuntu, but now I need to use it in my embedded environment, so I have to adapt sscep for MbedTLS.
I would like to know if there is some porting/migration guide from OpenSSL to MbedTLS.
Any kind of suggestion or support will be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Matteo
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next Monday at 10:00am PM UK time. Invite details can be found on
the online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
security issue in mbedtls 3.30 in the release notes:
"An adversary with access to precise enough information about memory
accesses (typically, an untrusted operating system attacking a secure
enclave) could recover an RSA private key after observing the victim
performing a single private-key operation if the window size used for the
exponentiation was 3 or smaller. Found and reported by Zili KOU,
Wenjian HE, Sharad Sinha, and Wei ZHANG. See "Cache Side-channel Attacks
and Defenses of the Sliding Window Algorithm in TEEs" - Design, Automation
and Test in Europe 2023."
was this issue solved in this version?
Hello,
I have 3rd party custom ECC library, that can do ECDSA verification and uses secp256r1 compressed public key (33bytes) to do so - all works fine.
Now I want to migrate to mbedTLS, to also benefit of other crypto schemes, hence use of mbedtls ECDSA was a natural way to go.
Here I need (as I understand) PEM parser or optionally public key in uncompressed format (0x04 | X | Y).
Problem is that loading of the key seems to work (func returns 0), but verification fails with -20450, indicating (if I well understood) invalid signature.
Test data.
PRIVATE KEY:
-----BEGIN PRIVATE KEY-----
MIGHAgEAMBMGByqGSM49AgEGCCqGSM49AwEHBG0wawIBAQQgKNqyWso/lMuTlTE6
ll47Jboqq/Iz7OYDrr7TuXN+s2ChRANCAARNgfaUcxLoWWG01ekJFiqB8ujMgnHz
P320ZgiZErH6zKjlB9EovIHrchj0240+EIpFios+2uM609FgRvu3+NrT
-----END PRIVATE KEY-----
PUBLIC KEY:
-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----
MDkwEwYHKoZIzj0CAQYIKoZIzj0DAQcDIgADTYH2lHMS6FlhtNXpCRYqgfLozIJx
8z99tGYImRKx+sw=
-----END PUBLIC KEY-----
PUBLIC KEY UNCOMPRESSED SEC1:
0x4,0x4d,0x81,0xf6,0x94,0x73,0x12,0xe8,0x59,0x61,0xb4,0xd5,0xe9,0x9,0x16,0x2a,0x81,0xf2,0xe8,0xcc,0x82,0x71,0xf3,0x3f,0x7d,0xb4,0x66,0x8,0x99,0x12,0xb1,0xfa,0xcc,0xa8,0xe5,0x7,0xd1,0x28,0xbc,0x81,0xeb,0x72,0x18,0xf4,0xdb,0x8d,0x3e,0x10,0x8a,0x45,0x8a,0x8b,0x3e,0xda,0xe3,0x3a,0xd3,0xd1,0x60,0x46,0xfb,0xb7,0xf8,0xda,0xd3
PUBLIC KEY COMPRESSED SEC1:
0x3,0x4d,0x81,0xf6,0x94,0x73,0x12,0xe8,0x59,0x61,0xb4,0xd5,0xe9,0x9,0x16,0x2a,0x81,0xf2,0xe8,0xcc,0x82,0x71,0xf3,0x3f,0x7d,0xb4,0x66,0x8,0x99,0x12,0xb1,0xfa,0xcc
INPUT STRING in TEXT format:
"This is my input data" (remove quotes)
INPUT STRING in HEX format:
0x54,0x68,0x69,0x73,0x20,0x69,0x73,0x20,0x6d,0x79,0x20,0x69,0x6e,0x70,0x75,0x74,0x20,0x64,0x61,0x74,0x61
SHA256 of INPUT STRING:
0xa7,0x3f,0x26,0xf4,0xa1,0xe4,0x61,0x61,0x0,0x1a,0x29,0xdf,0xd2,0xaf,0x7d,0xa,0x25,0x91,0xbb,0xcc,0x1f,0xbc,0xfb,0xdb,0x43,0xdb,0x57,0xf9,0x8d,0x94,0xeb,0x81
(x-checked here: https://emn178.github.io/online-tools/sha256.html)
SIGNATURE of HASH signed with PRIVATE KEY:
0x80,0xe6,0xf5,0x97,0x6a,0x66,0xa2,0xe2,0x9a,0xd7,0x7f,0x9a,0x9b,0x3e,0x2b,0xde,0x1f,0x7c,0x3,0xb3,0x1,0xb8,0x6f,0xd8,0xf6,0xf,0x27,0x38,0x63,0x3,0x54,0x74,0x76,0x6d,0x1b,0x97,0xf0,0xbc,0xc5,0xd2,0x4b,0xae,0xf0,0x34,0xab,0x86,0xbd,0x55,0x0,0x8a,0x4c,0x9f,0x4e,0xa5,0x53,0x89,0xe8,0x0,0xb9,0x83,0x24,0x87,0x98,0x1
My custom library code looks like - this one works as expected:
if (ecdsa_verify(public_key_compressed_33_bytes_array, hash_of_input_string, signature_signed_with_private_key)) {
printf("Custom ECDSA lib verification is OK\r\n");
}
My mbedTLS code looks like:
```
/* mbedTLS */
printf("mbedTLS way start\r\n");
mbedtls_ecdsa_init(&ctx);
mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&ctx.private_grp, MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1);
res = mbedtls_ecp_point_read_binary(&ctx.private_grp, &ctx.private_Q, ecc_public_key_uncompressed_bin,
sizeof(ecc_public_key_uncompressed_bin));
if (res != 0) {
printf("ECP point read binary failed: %d\r\n", res);
}
res = mbedtls_ecdsa_read_signature(&ctx, data_raw_hash_digest, sizeof(data_raw_hash_digest), signature,
sizeof(signature));
if (res == 0) {
printf("mbedTLS Verification is OK...\r\n");
} else {
printf("mbedTLS Verification failed...: %d\r\n", res);
}
printf("mbedTLS way end\r\n");
```
and it always fails with error code -20450. while loading keys function goes through well.
Am I wrongly loading the keys?
Hi, I recently had to do some PKCS#7 signature validation and was
disappointed to find that it didn't just work. After digging through
RFCs to figure out the myriad of things I'd done wrong I was also left
with a lack of 3 features in mbedtls:
1. The full certificate chain was not being loaded and explicitly not
supported. I believe this is in error since the certificate was never
actually used anywhere, meaning it basically errored out for no reason.
Since this certificate chain also contains the key used to validate the
signature in my case that presented a pretty fundamental problem.
2. signedAttributes were not supported at all.
3. All the fields in mbedtls_pkcs7 and its associated structures are
marked as MBEDTLS_PRIVATE. I need to inspect both the certificates and
the signedAttributes and would rather not have to parse the entire DER
myself.
I have attached patches implementing the first two. I believe I've done
so without altering the behavior of the calls although I'm a bit unsure
as to why mbedtls_x509_crt_verify doesn't take a const mbedtls_x509_crt.
The third issue is a matter of policy and I don't know what your opinion
on it is. For the moment I can at least get away with poking at the
internal fields.
I have tested it on several signatures, one of which I have included
here and I apologize in advance for the absolute spew but I thought it
better than attaching even more files.
The data:
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
It's SHA2-256 hash is:
C76DE7AF191C16E01405CE8FE89136EB60AC035B3DDE34ACF65220AC7C3CA619
If you decode the signature DER you'll see a matching id-messageDigest
in the signedAttributes towards the very bottom.
The signature in DER format:
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
886F70D010701301C06092A864886F70D010905310F170D3233303230393231333032345A302806092A864886F70D010934311B3019300B0609608648016503040201A10A06082A8648CE3D040302302F06092A864886F70D01090431220420C76DE7AF191C16E01405CE8FE89136EB60AC035B3DDE34ACF65220AC7C3CA619300A06082A8648CE3D04030204473045022100EE9B221CD9B5EEB1C6AF4160128D099C9414440A96C855A789846599E3BDE442022005AE51DC947E0B2AA6593E8FDB9F888782C71E5BB1CB6BF3C32B79C448C6A75D
Joakim
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next *Monday, Feb 27th at 10:00am UK time*. Invite details can be
found on the online calendar here
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
As usual, if anyone has any topics, please let Dave Rodgman, cc'd, know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi,
I'm using AES 128 GCM with TLS 1.2 and trying to understand the AES key expansion code for decrypting received SSL records.
I'm not an expert on AES but as I understand it, we use the IV (4 byte salt + 8 byte explicit nonce in the received message), pad to 16 bytes, increment and use this as input to the AES key expansion for the first block of ciphertext. This produces a round key per AES round (10 rounds for AES 128). We then increment our IV as input to the key expansion and generate the rounding keys for the next block.
I noticed aesni_setkey_enc_128 in aesni.c contains the Intel AES-NI instruction AESKEYGENASSIST which helps with key expansion.
However, what's confusing me is when I add a breakpoint in GDB, this function is only called once, via mbedtls_ctr_drbg_seed in ctr_drbg.c. I thought we need to do the key expansion on every block, to generate the round keys?
I kept looking at the code and I noticed mbedtls_aesni_crypt_ecb, which contains the Intel AES-NI instructions for performing decryption.
This loads the round key via ctx->buf + ctx->rk_offset but I do not see any code updating this round key per block.
Could someone please explain where the round keys are generated for each round, per block?
Thanks,
Hi All,
I have a couple of tasks which use LWIP and which get suspended for a
few seconds during TLS RSA/EC crypto. One (a primitive http server)
uses Netconn and the other (a serial to TCP data copy process) uses
sockets.
I also have a number of tasks which don't do any networking and which
run as they should, throughout. Experimentation of what priority these
need is difficult but it looks like it needs to be at/above the tasks
which invoke TLS. If their priority is 0 then TLS hangs them up as
well.
After much experimentation with RTOS priorities, this is what I found,
and I wonder if it is right:
TCP/IP applications (whether using the LWIP Netconn API or the LWIP
socket API) should run at a priority equal to or lower than that of
LWIP itself which [in this project] is osPriorityHigh (40). TCP/IP
applications can be run with a priority all the way down to
tskIDLE_PRIORITY (0).
The exception is if TLS is in use. TLS does not yield to the RTOS; you
get a solid CPU time lump of ~3 secs (STM 32F417, hardware AES only).
TLS starts in the priority of the task which invokes it, but
subsequent TLS-driven TCP/IP operations run at the priority of LWIP.
So when TLS is doing the session setup crypto, tasks of a priority
lower than LWIP get suspended. If this gap is an issue, the priority
of the relevant tasks should be equal to LWIP's. Furthermore, due to
the structure of LWIP, the priority of a task using it should not be
higher than LWIP (24) since it might cause blocking on socket (or
netconn) writes.
Does this make sense?
It looks like LWIP blocks all netconn and socket ops when TLS is using
it. Is that possible?
I am running with
#define LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING 0
#define LWIP_ALLOW_MEM_FREE_FROM_OTHER_CONTEXT 1
#define SYS_LIGHTWEIGHT_PROT 1
as this was found to have much better granularity for task switching.
With LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING=1 you end up with a crude mutex across
the entire API call, which is fine in a single RTOS task.
Thank you in advance for any pointers.
Peter
Hi Team,
I have a requirement to generate self signed certificate programmatically.
I have raw EDCSA key pairs generated via OP-TEE APIs.
I m trying to generate self signed certificate. I tried the example as shown in programs/x509/cert_write.c. This doesn't work for me as I have raw key pairs where as this expects the key pairs to be in either pem/der format.
I tried the following code but it throws error "0xffffdd00" when I call mbedtls_x509write_crt_der
Code to set the raw key pairs:
mbedtls_ecdh_context issuer_ctx;
mbedtls_ecdh_init(&issuer_ctx);
ret = mbedtls_ecdh_setup(&issuer_ctx, MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP384R1);
if (ret != 0) {
goto exit;
}
res = TA_ECSetPublicKey(&issuer_ctx, public_keyX, public_key_Y, 48);
if (res != TEE_SUCCESS)
{
goto exit;
}
res = TA_ECSetPrivateKey(&issuer_ctx, private_key, 48);
if (res != TEE_SUCCESS)
{
goto exit;
}
Am I doing something wrong ? Please help
It would be very helpful if some working example of generating certificate programmatically is shared for my reference
Thanks,
Prithvi
Hello,
In our project we use mbedTLS together with freeRTOS. mbedTLS requires an mbedtls_ssl_context (let's say `ssl_context`) for the send (`mbedtls_ssl_write(...)`) and receive (`mbedtls_ssl_read(...)`) functions. In our project we have a freeRTOS task `A` to send data with mbedTLS and a freeRTOS task `B`to receive data with mbedTLS over the same session/interface. Both tasks use the same `ssl_context` instance. Potentially sending and receiving can happen at the same time.
Is it safe to use the same `ssl_context` instance from both taks? Or should only one task access the `ssl_context`?
At the moment we are using `mbedtls_ssl_read(...)` in blocking mode and hence the `ssl_context` cannot be protected against multiple access with a mutex because then the sending task cannot obtain the mutex as long as the receiving task is the blocked receiving state (holding the mutext).
Thank you for your help.
Best regards,
Pascal
Hello,
We intend to remove DES (including Triple-DES) in the next major version
of Mbed TLS, i.e. Mbed TLS 4.0. We do not yet have a release date, but
at the moment it seems likely that there will be a new major version in
2024. As usual, the Mbed TLS 3.x series will keep the current support
for DES, and we intend to maintain the last 3.x minor release as a
long-term support branch for 3 years.
Rationale: Most security standards deprecate DES if they do not forbid
it already. Tooling is widely available to switch to AES or other
cipher. In particular, NIST will forbid Triple-DES except to decrypt
legacy data after 31 December 2023 (following SP 800-131A
<https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-131Ar2.pdf>).
We would like to remove the last 64-bit block cipher from Mbed TLS to
simplify some parts of the code and reduce the maintenance burden.
If you wish for Mbed TLS to keep supporting DES longer, please let us
know what your business case is, either by replying to this email or on
the GitHub issue: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/7024
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Dear MbedTLS dev,
I am writing an opaque driver (equivalent of PSA_CRYPTO_TEST_DRIVER_LOCATION/PSA_KEY_PERSISTENCE_READ_ONLY in the test suite) with the PSA API compiled with MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_BUILTIN_KEYS.
But I am not sure if I have to use "psa_import_key" before "psa_driver_wrapper_sign_message" or if I have to "read/generate" the builtin key on the fly, at each psa_driver_wrapper_* operation ?
Would it be possible to add this example in the test suite ? Or explain how builtin key + opaque driver is supposed to be used with, for example, "psa_driver_wrapper_sign_message" ?
I put more details below.
Thank you in advance,
Best regards,
Rehan
#############################################################################
I would like to write an example doing :
I) psa_sign_message (ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256)
II) psa_export_public_key
III) psa_verify_message (with the public key from II)
I am following the examples provided by the test suite, especially :
1) sign_message transparent driver: calculate in driver ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256
using the API :
- psa_import_key
- psa_sign_message
with the attributes :
- key_type = PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR(PSA_ECC_FAMILY_SECP_R1)
2) PSA opaque driver builtin pubkey export: secp256r1
using the API :
- psa_export_public_key
with the attributes :
- key_id = MBEDTLS_PSA_KEY_ID_BUILTIN_MIN + 1
- key_type = PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR(PSA_ECC_FAMILY_SECP_R1)
and the driver code :
- platform_builtin_keys.c : mbedtls_psa_platform_get_builtin_key() (PSA_KEY_PERSISTENCE_READ_ONLY, PSA_CRYPTO_TEST_DRIVER_LOCATION)
- test_driver_key_management.c : mbedtls_test_opaque_export_public_key()
3) verify_message transparent driver: calculate in driver ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256
using the API :
- psa_import_key
- psa_verify_message
with the attributes :
- key_type = PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR(PSA_ECC_FAMILY_SECP_R1)
It seems to me that II)=2) and 3) should be pretty similar to III) because I assume that neither transparent vs opaque, nor PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR vs PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_PUBLIC_KEY_BASE, is gonna change much here.
But the signature I) is less clear... Has the built-in key feature been thought such that the read-only key is read each time we call a different PSA API function ?
Long story short, an "opaque driver + builtin keys" equivalent of the "sign_message transparent driver: calculate in driver ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256" example in the test-suite would be really helpful :)
Hello,
Is it possible to use PSA crypto APIs for SHA256 and RSA signature verification for RH850F1KMS1 microcontroller from renesas which has G3KH cpu core.
Let me know your thoughts.
Thank you in advance.
Regards,
Ujjwal
Hello,
I am writing this mail in order to get support.
I am using RH850-F1KMS1 microcontroller from Renesas, and I need to integrate mbed to perform SHA256 and RSA-1024 digital signature verification.
The controller is bare metal and does not have any OS like freeRTOS.
Just want to understand how to integrate mbed code in our project.
Thank you in advance for the help.
Regards,
Ujjwal
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Dave,
Please keep in mind that next Monday is a Federal Holiday in the US, so
this may impact attendance.
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello,
You are concerned if: you contribute to Mbed TLS, or you maintain local patches to Mbed TLS.
You are not concerned if: you just use Mbed TLS.
We are going to change the C coding style in Mbed TLS. The new style is mostly what you'd find in The C Programming Language, 2nd edition, by Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie (K&R2). The main changes compared to the current style are:
* Spaces outside parentheses, not inside. No space in f(x).
* Opening braces on the same line as if(), for(), etc., but on a separate line for functions.
Indentation remains 4 spaces. The recommended maximum line length remains 80 columns. There are a few deviations from K&R2, documentation will be available shortly.
The new code style will be enforced by the CI testing. This means that style that's rejected by the tool will not be merged, full stop. This also means that sometimes we'll have code that looks a bit less good to humans because the tool insists on it. We're doing this to avoid wasting reviewers' and contributors' time with style violations in code review.
The tool we're using is uncrustify<https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify>. You can see how your code will look like by installing uncrustify 0.75.1 and running scripts/code_style.py from mbedtls-3.3.0 or mbedtls-2.28.2. There are previews of the rewritten branches at https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/tree/features/new-code-style/development and https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/tree/features/new-code-style/mbedtls-2.… (updated every few days until the real branches are rewritten). If you're now starting work on a new feature or bugfix, it will probably be easier to start from those branches, and do an easy rebase once they become official.
If you've been working on a branch, we will provide a script to rebase the branch and rewrite it to the new style commit by commit. You'll need to have uncrustify 0.75.1.
Concretely, when we change the code style:
* If you've started to work on a branch but review has not started yet, we'll ask you to adapt your branch to the new code style.
* If your work is under review, you'll need to adapt your branch to the new code style before it can be merged. Rebasing a branch is disruptive for reviews, so please synchronize with the reviewers to decide on a good time.
We plan to do the switch during the first week of January 2023.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi All,
I raised the issue below in the MBED-TLS github, as per suggestion from the moderator asking it in the mailing-list. Below are the details.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6864
I am running Mbed TLS as a core security library(2.24.0), on an embedded platform.
I am using the FreeRADIUS server for AAA authentication.
I am able to get the PMK values correctly at the supplicant side, however while decrypting the MPPE key at the gateway side I see that the values are incorrect specially in the API(radius_client_sec_prot_ms_mppe_recv_key_pmk_decrypt)
Below are my setup details:
FreeRADIUS server setup on Ubuntu(3.2.1)
openssl :1.1.1f
Ubuntu version : 20.04.04LTS
System information
Client side setup
Platform : Micro controller based platform
OS : FreeRTOS
Compiler gcc-arm-none-eabi-8-2019-q3-update
Sample example
MPPE KEY in clear at RADIUS Server
Fri Dec 30 23:50:13 2022 : Debug: (209) MS-MPPE-Recv-Key = 0x2f6c3e7e748eb49a598c208af3ef520454f5aa6873bc72f7f32be1053914a566
Fri Dec 30 23:50:13 2022 : Debug: (209) MS-MPPE-Send-Key = 0xa04539819a272e94782af1818b05878bb0e420d08a51accd6c3cb75baaecbd75
PMK Key values at Supplicant(which is same as MPPE-RECV-KEY)
PMK Key values at Supplicant(which is same as MPPE-RECV-KEY)
2022-12-30 23:50:07.313 #1 0000000000000000 <log> 0:28:21.215 [debug] [ tlsp] {Wi-SUN Ev}: >>>> PRINT THE KEY PMK >>>>
2022-12-30 23:50:07.313 #1 0000000000000000 <log> 0:28:21.224 [debug] [ tlsp] {Wi-SUN Ev}: EAP-TLS key material 2f:6c:3e:7e:74:8e:b4:9a:59:8c:20:8a:f3:ef:52:04:54:f5:aa:68:73:bc:72:f7:f3:2b:e1:05:39:14:a5:66
which is same as the value that we see at the RADIUS Server.
Decrypted key Value at Authenticator(using the API radius_client_sec_prot_ms_mppe_recv_key_pmk_decrypt)
2022-12-30 23:51:34.763 #1 0000000000000000 <log> 3:09:17.919 [debug] [ hmac] {Wi-SUN Ev}: hmac_md key a9:69:02:e9:3a:1d:cd:05:31:b3:77:cd:d6:d7:c2:c7:2d:52:4b:0a:5b:b1:aa:81:20:67:dd:b8:1c:04:ef:63
Mbed TLS version (number or commit id): 2.24.0
Operating system and version:
Configuration (if not default, please attach mbedtls_config.h):
Compiler and options (if you used a pre-built binary, please indicate how you obtained it):
Additional environment information:
Expected behavior
The key should be decrypted with the correct value.
Actual behavior
The key is not getting the correct value.
Steps to reproduce
Additional information
Kindly let me know what is missing here ?
Thanks in advance.
With regards,
Ajay.
Brentwood, UK.
With mbedTLS set up as a streaming server (e.g. https), can it deal
with two attempts to connect that arrive in quick succession, so two
handshakes are occurring simultaneously?
David
I have a working Client code in which I use MbedTLS functions to send HTTPS GET request to my server. For sending data to the server, I use mbedtls_ssl_write(). But this call is blocking.
My goal is to make this function call (mbedtls_ssl_write()) non-blocking. What is the correct way to do it ?
I read the documentation and concluded that:
1. I have to set the bio callbacks using the mbedtls_ssl_set_bio() function where I have to pass the callback functions as parameters in this function call.
2. I have to set the SSL context as non-blocking using the mbedtls_net_set_nonblock() function call
3. I have used the default bio callbacks, named mbedtls_net_send and mbedtls_net_recv, which are defined in net_sockets.c
My question is:
After setting the default bio callbacks (mbedtls_net_send and mbedtls_net_recv) and setting the SSL context as non-blocking (mbedtls_net_set_nonblock) which function should I use for non-blocking write/read. Will it be mbedtls_ssl_write() and mbedtls_ssl_read() ? And will the call back functions (which are set using mbedtls_ssl_set_bio) be called when read/write completes?
Please help me with advice on how to implement non-blocking write/read using MbedTLS functions.
Thanks and Regards,
Sritam Paltasingh.
Hi,
PSA driver interface specification talks about "add_entropy" entry point.
Snippet pasted below.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/proposed/psa-driv…
*A driver can declare an entropy source by providing a "get_entropy" entry
point. This entry point has the following prototype for a driver with the
prefix "acme":*
*psa_status_t acme_get_entropy(uint32_t flags,
size_t *estimate_bits,
uint8_t *output,
size_t output_size);*
However, in the current implementation of MbedTLS 3.x I don't see
this implemented . With the psa_crypto-init() what I observe is that if the
platform enables MBEDTLS_ENTROPY_HARDWARE_ALT then using "
mbedtls_hardware_poll(),
the entropy source can be provided.
Can you please confirm if this observation is correct and also let us know
if the <driver>_get_entropy() is planned to be implemented in near future ?
Regards,
Ruchika
This event has been canceled.
MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Monday Jan 2, 2023 ⋅ 3am – 3:50am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
Guests
Don Harbin - creator
nnac123(a)gmail.com
santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
kris.kwiatkowski(a)pqshield.com
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Dear sir/madam
I have following queries regarding implementation of MBED CRYPTO Libraries :
1) How crypto libraries files could be used on baremetal with no entropy
source(cross compilation )?
2) How asymmetric cryptographic operations like RSA , RNG , EC ,DSA etc ,
could be implemented on baremetal without entropy , seed provisions ?
3) If i want to use some custom PRNG and entropy , then how the respective
contexts structures could be filled ?
Thanks & Regards,
*Prashant Tripathi*
Hi Mbed TLS users,
We are pleased to announce the release of Mbed TLS versions 3.3.0 and 2.28.2.
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and bring other minor changes. Full details are available in the release notes (https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.3.0 and https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.2 ).
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
The releases are available from
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases
Dave Rodgman
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
I am using mbedtls_x509write_csr_set_subject_name API from mbedtls to set the subject name.
I wanted to set the arbitrary old value in my certificate for e.g.
ffeBgt9jDHhBwPDANgtT7R/1.3.6.1.4.1.37244.2.1=FFF2/1.3.6.1.4.1.37244.2.2=8001
In this case ffeBgt9jDHhBwPDANgtT7R is the CN
And 1.3.6.1.4.1.37244.2.1 is an arbitrary OID which has a value of FFF2 similar to the second arbitrary OID.
I am able to do this through openssl commands, but while doing it through mbedtls, when I pass it as a string then mbedtls considers the whole string as CN which Is not my intention.
Please fine the asn1 parsing of the CSR as below
CSR generated through mbedtls:
18:d=5 hl=2 l= 3 prim: OBJECT :commonName
23:d=5 hl=2 l= 76 prim: UTF8STRING :ffeBgt9jDHhBwPDANgtT7R/1.3.7.1.4.1.37466.2.1=FFF2+1.3.7.1.4.1.37466.2.2=8001
101:d=3 hl=2 l= 11 cons: SET
103:d=4 hl=2 l= 9 cons: SEQUENCE
Target CSR ( done thorough openssl):
14:d=4 hl=2 l= 29 cons: SEQUENCE
16:d=5 hl=2 l= 3 prim: OBJECT :commonName
21:d=5 hl=2 l= 22 prim: UTF8STRING :ffeBgt9jDHhBwPDANgtT7R
45:d=3 hl=2 l= 20 cons: SET
47:d=4 hl=2 l= 18 cons: SEQUENCE
49:d=5 hl=2 l= 10 prim: OBJECT :1.3.7.1.4.1.37466.2.1
61:d=5 hl=2 l= 4 prim: UTF8STRING :FFF2
67:d=3 hl=2 l= 20 cons: SET
69:d=4 hl=2 l= 18 cons: SEQUENCE
71:d=5 hl=2 l= 10 prim: OBJECT :1.3.7.1.4.1.37466.2.2
83:d=5 hl=2 l= 4 prim: UTF8STRING :8001
89:d=2 hl=2 l= 89 cons: SEQUENCE
91:d=3 hl=2 l= 19 cons: SEQUENCE
93:d=4 hl=2 l= 7 prim: OBJECT :id-ecPublicKey
102:d=4 hl=2 l= 8 prim: OBJECT :prime256v1
Am I missing something here? Do I need to provide the CN in a different way to get the intended result?
I found an open issue https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/4886, could it be related to this?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks and Regards,
Aditya
Hi All,
Some websites crash MbedTLS, in
void mbedtls_ecp_point_free( mbedtls_ecp_point *pt )
{
if( pt == NULL )
return;
mbedtls_mpi_free( &( pt->X ) );
mbedtls_mpi_free( &( pt->Y ) );
mbedtls_mpi_free( &( pt->Z ) );
}
It crashes in the last function call of the three above.
Thread #1 [main] 1 [core: 0] (Suspended : Signal :
SIGTRAP:Trace/breakpoint trap)
HardFault_Handler() at stm32f4xx_it.c:103 0x8053c22
<signal handler called>() at 0xffffffed
0x3810180
mbedtls_ecp_point_free() at ecp.c:594 0x8029c7a
0x81030100
It crashes properly i.e. invalid opcodes etc.
There is a fair bit on google with others having gone down the same
road, never resolved.
One site which does it is socata.org but quite a few others do it.
Probably 10% of "major name" websites cause it to crash.
It may have been undiscovered for a long time, or ever, because most
MbedTLS clients are connecting to specific private servers only.
People aren't using it to connect to microsoft.com (which doesn't
actually crash but the handshake returns 0x2700 which can be
investigated).
There is a Windows build of MbedTLS (v2.16.2) which seems to work in
the crashing cases. Stepping through this in Cube IDE (32F417) it
looks like the crash is due to a buffer being filled with random
numbers. The guy working on this is contactable only on Monday
afternoons so I am a bit screwed :) He said he found something about
that buffer, or maybe a corrupted function pointer.
But as I said this issue has come up before according to numerous
online searches and maybe someone can recognise it.
Hardware AES is enabled but this occurs with software AES also. No
other 32F417 hardware crypto features are used, other than its random
number generator.
TLS is v2.16.2.
Thank you in advance for any pointers.
Peter
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next *Monday, Dec 5 at 10:00am UK time*. Invite details can be
found on the online calendar here
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
As usual, if anyone has any topics, please let Dave Rodgman, cc'd, know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi All,
Mbed TLS is planning to move to a new code style by the end of this year. The proposed new style is currently being discussed in the GitHub pull request:
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/pull/6591
If you have any feedback on this new style, or you think we should tweak it, feel free to comment on the pull request. We will take your thoughts into account when we decide on the final style.
Discussions will continue until the evening of THIS FRIDAY (UK time).
Many thanks,
David Horstmann for the Mbed TLS Team
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello everyone,
We observed a strange behavior in the mbedTLS client, when client authentication is requested by the TLS server. This behavior was observed in the newer version 3.0.0 as well as in older versions.
The scenario is the following: The server selects a ciphersuite e.g. ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 and sends a CertificateRequest message that only includes the ecdsa_secp256r1_sha256 signature algorithm.
However, the mbedTLS client simply ignores the requested hash function and uses ecdsa_secp256r1_sha384 for the signature in the ClientVerify.
Then, the server complains since the signature does not match with the requested signature algorithm and sends a handshake failure.
It seems that mbedTLS does not store the requested signature algorithms/hash function from the CertificateRequest and always uses the hash function from the selected ciphersuite.
In the ssl_write_certificate_verify function, we find the following comment:
/*
* digitally-signed struct {
* opaque handshake_messages[handshake_messages_length];
* };
*
* Taking shortcut here. We assume that the server always allows the
* PRF Hash function and has sent it in the allowed signature
* algorithms list received in the Certificate Request message.
*
* Until we encounter a server that does not, we will take this
* shortcut.
*
* Reason: Otherwise we should have running hashes for SHA512 and
* SHA224 in order to satisfy 'weird' needs from the server
* side.
*/
Is this a known problem and is there any fix available?
Cheers,
Simon Nachtigall
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next *Monday, Nov 7 at 10:00am UK time*. Invite details can be
found on the online calendar here
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman, cc'd, know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi all,
I'd like to know if there is some way to retrieve the currently available number of bytes of application data without calling mbedtls_ssl_read()?
I'm writing a "TLS socket" for higher layers to use and would like to notify them when new application data is available, tell them how much it is, but leave it up to them when and how much to retrieve.
I'd like to prevent having to buffer all application data inside my TLS socket, because that would mean copying it once from mbedtls' buffer to my socket and then again from there to the application whenever it actually requests the data.
After a quick look into the sources, it seems like, if at all, this might be possible for single records. But all related fields are private and I could not find any API for this.
Issue #551 [1] seems related, but is more about peeking into the application data, while I would be fine with knowing just the size of available application data.
Thanks for any hints on how I could achieve this.
Best regards,
Jan
[1] https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/551
________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.
Hello,
Summary: I am soliciting feedback about builds of Mbed TLS where *there
is both a PSA implementation and the built-in software implementation of
the same algorithm, by design, *and the PSA implementation isn't just
calling the built-in implementation because the two have different
characteristics, each desirable in some context. Please read this
message if you are doing this or considering it. Feel free to ignore
otherwise.
For example, both MBEDTLS_SHA256_C and MBEDTLS_PSA_ACCEL_ALG_SHA_256 are
enabled, so that calls to mbedtls_md_xxx() use the software
implementation and calls to psa_hash_xxx() use the hardware accelerator
via the PSA driver. And this is deliberate: there is a reason why
mbedtls_md_xxx() must not call the PSA driver.
In most cases, this is not desirable: if there's an accelerator, why not
use it? And we're working to allow getting rid of the software
implementation in more and more cases. Ultimately, PSA will be the only
crypto interface in Mbed TLS, so all interfaces to calculate SHA-256
will go through psa_hash_xxx() and therefore will dispatch the call to
the driver if there is one. This will be an API break, since it will
require calling psa_crypto_init() before performing any cryptography.
Currently we are planning to introduce this requirement in Mbed TLS 4.0.
But it is currently possible to have dual algorithm support, and I can
think of unusual cases where it might desirable.
Scenario 1, with accelerator drivers: there is a driver, but it can only
be used after some initialization. The application needs to use the
algorithm before calling psa_crypto_init(), so it calls the legacy
interface. After psa_crypto_init() has been called, the application
would like to use the driver as much as possible. A typical use case is
a bootloader which wants to verify a signature before initializing the
random generator, so it calls mbedtls_md_xxx() and mbedtls_rsa_xxx().
Scenario 1 is clearly desirable, and for that we have a planned
solution, which is staged initialization. The bootloader will be able to
(1) initialize drivers, (2) perform a hash calculation, (3) initialize
the keystore, (4) verify a signature, all without initializing the RNG.
We won't make psa_crypto_init() mandatory until this feature is implemented.
Scenario 2: with a cryptography service. This is a build of Mbed TLS
with MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_CLIENT, so all psa_xxx() calls call the service.
But, for some reason, there is also a local implementation of some
cryptography algorithms. So you can call mbedtls_md() to calculate a
hash even before the connection to the service has been established. Or
maybe you want to call mbedtls_md() for short messages and
psa_hash_compute() for long messages, because the crypto service has a
faster implementation but the communication overhead offsets the gain
for short messages.
We are currently working on improving support for PSA drivers, and in
particular, saving code size by eliminating more unnecessary code when a
driver is present, and increasing the set of APIs that benefit from
drivers. The obvious way to do that is to make all cryptography calls
(especially from X.509 and TLS) go via the PSA interface, but we can't
do that yet due to the need to have initialized the keystore and RNG. We
are considering routing /certain/ crypto calls via PSA, in a way that
would break scenario 2, and would also break scenario 1 in some cases,
but not for hashes or signature verification.
If, for example, in Mbed TLS 3.4, mbedtls_md() starts calling
psa_hash_(), would this break your code? Are you in scenario 1, scenario
2, or some other variant I haven't thought of?
If so, *please reply to this message and let us know what your needs
are*. Feel free to reply to me in private if you don't want to discuss
this publicly (I won't share directly outside Arm, but the eventual
design might leak information about the unusual scenario).
If we don't hear objections, there is a chance that a future Mbed TLS
3.x will break scenarios 1 and 2. If we do hear objections, we'll work
to keep the current behavior or arrange a migration path.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
I have port mbedtls 2.28.0 into my platform and am able to connect to a few websites in PKI mode. But after enabling MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO & MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_EXTERNAL_RNG, with everything else stay the same, I can't connect to the same websites anymore. in the working case (no MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO), after the client (my app) sends "Certificate, Client Key Exchange, Certificate Verify, Change Cipher Spec, Encrypted Handshake Message", the server responds with "Change Cipher Spec, Encrypted Handshake Message". In the broken case (with MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO), after the client (my app) sends "Certificate, Client Key Exchange, Certificate Verify, Change Cipher Spec, Encrypted Handshake Message", the server doesn't respond with "Change Cipher Spec, Encrypted Handshake Message". I don't know how to debug the issue, any suggestion what my cause the server to drop off at the last step?
I may need TLS 1.3 support which I believe arrived in 2.28, or maybe a
bit later.
I don't want to change to TLS 3 just yet. It looks like many changes.
My target is "OK" on FLASH (150k of the 350k total code size) but is
tight on RAM (after allocating 50k for the MbedTLS heap, we have just
20k RAM left).
Ideally I would like the very last version of v2.
The problem just found is that Cloudflare is asking for TLS 1.3 which
MbedTLS 2.16 does not support. But it may be that Cloudflare can fall
back and the problem is elsewhere.
Many thanks for any input.
Hi,
This is an updated post from https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6464,
which should be posted in mbedtls mail list.
My question is how to significantly improve SHA256 performance on big files
(regardless of architectures).
*=== Updates*
I use same code with mbedtls-3.1.0 to run tests in x86, and performance is
still downgraded.
Mbed TLS version (number or commit id): *3.1.0*
Operating system and version: * Centos-8.5, CPU 11900K*
Configuration (if not default, please attach mbedtls_config.h):
Compiler and options (if you used a pre-built binary, please indicate how
you obtained it): *gcc/g++ 8.5*
Additional environment information:
*Test files and performance*
CentOS-8.5.2111-x86_64-boot.iso (827.3 MB): sha256 *5 sec*
CentOS-8.5.2111-x86_64-boot.iso (10.79 GB): sha256 *66 sec*
Also, as advised I try to turn on "MBEDTLS_SHA256_USE_A64_CRYPTO_IF_PRESENT
" and "MBEDTLS_SHA512_USE_A64_CRYPTO_IF_PRESENT" using mbedtls-3.2.0 in M1,
but compiler reported the following error:
CMake Error at library/CMakeLists.txt:257 (add_library):
Cannot find source file:
psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.c
Tried extensions .c .C .c++ .cc .cpp .cxx .cu .mpp .m .M .mm .ixx .cppm .h
.hh .h++ .hm .hpp .hxx .in .txx .f .F .for .f77 .f90 .f95 .f03 .hip .ispc
CMake Error at library/CMakeLists.txt:257 (add_library):
No SOURCES given to target: mbedcrypto
Thanks for your help.
*=== Original message at github*
Summary
sha256() and sha1() incurs significant overhead on big files(~1G above). *This
might not be an issue*, and I'm looking for an efficient way to calculate
hash on big files.
System information
Mbed TLS version (number or commit id): 3.1.0
Operating system and version: M1 OSX
Configuration (if not default, please attach mbedtls_config.h):
Compiler and options (if you used a pre-built binary, please indicate how
you obtained it): Clang++
Additional environment information:
Expected behavior
Fast calculation of big files in less than 1 second
Actual behavior
Test files:
CentOS-8.5.2111-x86_64-boot.iso (827.3 MB): sha1 *3.3 sec*, sha256 *5.9
sec*
CentOS-8.5.2111-x86_64-boot.iso (10.79 GB): sha1 *40 sec*, sha256 *78
sec*
Steps to reproduce
ISO files can be downloaded at:
http://ftp.iij.ad.jp/pub/linux/centos-vault/8.5.2111/isos/x86_64/
Make sure use fast disk, say nvme, to store ISO files, or else loading big
files could take lots of time. Also use user from time command to measure
performance.
Workable code of sha256:
string test_sha256(string file_path)
{
mbedtls_sha256_context ctx;
FILE *fp;
string output;
int BUFFER_SIZE = 4096;
uint8_t buffer[BUFFER_SIZE];
size_t read, k_bytes;
uint8_t hash[32];
mbedtls_sha256_init(&ctx);
mbedtls_sha256_starts(&ctx, 0);
fp = fopen(file_path.c_str(), "r");
if (fp == NULL)
{
mbedtls_sha256_free(&ctx);
return output;
}
while ((read = fread(buffer, 1, BUFFER_SIZE, fp)))
{
mbedtls_sha256_update(&ctx, buffer, read);
}
mbedtls_sha256_finish(&ctx, hash);
mbedtls_sha256_free(&ctx);
fclose(fp);
// update hash string, omit here
return output;
}
Hi All,
There are machines out there for testing servers but I don't know of
one which can be used for testing a client.
This is a tricky area. For example I have a board running, LWIP and
MbedTLS, uploading little test files to two sites.
One was running EC and AES256. It worked fine.
The other was running RSA and AES256 but didn't work, and after some
work it was found that its certificate chain was running SHA-1 on the
top level certificate, dated 2006. This is actually a major name on
the internet! And we didn't have SHA-1 enabled because it is supposed
to be deprecated.
I wonder if there is some practical way to test out all this. We can
probably enable all the MbedTLS crypto options (TLS is taking up 150k
out of 350k of code for the whole product, but we can probably throw
in some more) but testing them is something else.
There is a test suite in TLS but it needs to be embedded in the
product itself. Has someone implemented that code on a server
somewhere?
Thank you in advance for any pointers.
Peter
I meet a problem when I call function `psa_crypto_init`, it return error code -148 that was PSA_ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_ENTROPY.
I track this function step by step and found it caused by MBEDTLS_ERR_ENTROPY_NO_SOURCES_DEFINED. Code in entropy.c, if( ctx->source_count == 0 ), return this error.
My question:
I run code on Ubuntu, it runs well. But in some arm board, it returns this error. Why this count will be 0 sometimes? What is the root cause of this error.
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi,
I have developed a TLS and EST client application. Where the EST server issues the certificate in PKCS#7 format. It seems mbedtls library not support certificates in PKCS#7 format.
Is there any plan to support PKCS#7 in future?
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next *Monday, Oct 10 at 10:00am UK time*. Invite details can be
found on the online calendar here
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman, cc'd, know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello
Please note that this is a repost from my previous message from yesterday
as it seemd to have bugged (empty text + html attachement) when viewed
from the archive. Apologies.
Short question :
how do i output an in-memory mbedtls_x509_crt chain to PEM text ?
Context :
I have a project where the user provides a PEM bundle to be used for HTTPS
As it is provided by a user, may be incomplete or malformed :
- no private key
- more than 1 private key
- no certificate at all
- duplicate certificates
- no certificate matching the private key
- broken chain
- extraneous certificates not part of the chain…
So i want to full validate user input.
Here is what i have succeeded so far :
- parse the bundle into atomic parts, based on « BEGIN/END » labels
- try to mbedtls_x509_crt_parse / mbedtls_pk_parse_key each part (no chain)
- check that i only have one private key in the bundle
- search for the certificat C matching the private key
- starting from that atomic certificate, verify it against each other
candidate certificate
- if it validates, add it to the chain of C, and repeat until no
candidate validates
- then check that there are no remaining certificate (which never
validated anything)
- finally print and store the chain (as it’s now deemed correct and minimal)
Now i want to store it in PEM format for later use.
But i do not understand the way to do it :
- there are no write functions for mbedtls_x509_crt
- the mbedtls_x509write_cert structure shares few members with mbedtls_x509_crt
- i have not found yet how to get/convert many of the missing members
- as memory is tight i have have cleaned the « atomic parts » text buffers
(but if there is no other way, i'll keep and reuse them)
I guess it should be pretty simple, but i cannot wrap my head around it.
Thanks in advance for your help
Nicolas
PS : if steps 1-8 could be done more elegantly, please do not
hesitate to point me in the right direction.
Hi,
In mbedTLS road map, there is a future task to remove legacy cipher API (https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/mbed-tls/roadmap/). Does that mean all existing mbedtls crypto APIs will not be supported anymore?
mbedTLS is used for both its TLS and crypto library. I am curious how the planned changes will affect both set of users.
* Are the crypto library users expected to only use PSA crypto APIs and key IDs?
* Are the TLS library users expected to see API changes to TLS functions to support key IDs?
Thank,
Archanaa
Hi guys,
I use mbedtls for years (since 2.10 IIRC) upgrading to latest available as time goes by. For DTLS that is.
I remember a case in the past where a link would have a small MTU (around 500 bytes) and I had to tune ssl_context.handshake.mtu to a lower value to successfully complete handshakes.
I do not remember exactly why, but I did not want to actually restrict maximum value via mbedtls_ssl_set_mtu, maybe it was even ignored back then for handshakes… but
Now when working on migration to 3.2.1 (gave some time to 3x releases to stabilize) I noticed that the whole ssl_context.handshake member is now private and inaccessible, which I guess is fine.
Could somebody with more knowledge of the code recommend what is the best strategy for DTLS app where MTU may not always be 1400?
thanks a lot for your time,
Martin
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
We're seeing pretty much the same issue on 3.0.0 ARM. However, if I build the ssh_client2 tool on my host machine (x64) and try to mimic the config as close as possible, it works just fine.
Do you think we're seeing the same problem? Will try with a newer version next week.
Hello,
I am wondering if there are APIs for Hmac and Cmac verification?
from md.h and cmac.h, Hmac and Cmac generation functionalities are provided
in a single and streaming approach. But is there a plan to add verification
APIs for future releases maybe?
Kind regards,
Ahmed Mohammed
Hello,
What is the difference between these two macros in
include/mbedtls/build_info.h:
MBEDTLS_CONFIG_FILE
MBEDTLS_USER_CONFIG_FILE
In other words, why would I have two different user configuration files? Or
I misunderstand the difference between such files.
Kind regards,
Ahmed Mohammed
I am verifying a signature generated using ecdsa secp256r1. The signature is getting verified but the time taken by the verification step is too long. It takes 4-5 seconds to verify the signature. The implementation is bare metal i.e. no RTOS (one realizes the use of RTOS but still the time is too long). Can you please guide a way around for this issue. How to make it work faster , the ideal verification time would be 30ms - 60ms.
Here is a gist of my code
mbedtls_ecp_curve_info *curve_info = NULL;
mbedtls_ecdsa_context ecdsa_context;
/// Initialization
mbedtls_ecdsa_init(&ecdsa_context);
curve_info = mbedtls_ecp_curve_info_from_tls_id(23); /// 23 is tls_id of secp256r1
mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&ecdsa_context.grp, curve_info->grp_id);
/// Processing
result = mbedtls_ecp_point_read_binary(
&ecdsa_context.grp,
&ecdsa_context.Q,
public_key_data, // public key data in uncompressed format i.e. including leading 0x04
sizeof(public_key_data)
);
/// 32 /// 71
status_verify_signature = mbedtls_ecdsa_read_signature(&ecdsa_context, hash, sizeof(hash), signature, sizeof(sig)); /// converts the signature data to ASN1, verifies the signature
Thank you :)
Hello,
Can please provide me with any example on "how to achieve Mutual
authentication(Client and server certificate validation)" in mbed-tls.
Please help me with this.It is a little urgent.
Thank you
Regards
Anupma Jain
Hi all,
Apologies for the website outage. We have now restored the majority of the old content, which is reachable via our Trusted Firmware website (the old website address will redirect here). The new location for our documentation, including the knowledge base and security advisories, is:
https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
Please let us know (on the mailing list, via the Tech Forum, or raise a GitHub issue or PR) if you find any issues or missing documentation. The source repository for the docs is here:
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls-docs
Community contributions to the docs are welcome!
Regards
Dave Rodgman
Hi,
We have developed a propriety protocol that authenticate node using certificate. In our PKI, we have four level of certificates as ROOT_CA, PROXY_CA, LOCAL_CA, and DEVICE_CERTIFICATE. Parsing of trusted CA certificate is getting success. However, verifying PROXY_CA against ROOT_CA fails with below error code.
MBEDTLS_ERR_X509_UNKNOWN_SIG_ALG + MBEDTLS_ERR_OID_NOT_FOUND
I have viewed the certificates transacted using OpenSSL command, the ASN1 OID is ECDSA_SHA384. Though, I have enabled the algorithm, it is failing. Any support would be appreciated. Attached the config.h for your reference.
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
After recently updating mbedtls I noticed a considerable slowdown (over 70% on my cortex-m7 board) in the sha256 implementation, and after some digging I found the offending commit:
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/commit/76749aea784cfec245390d0d6f0ab0a2…
I understand the motivation behind the commit, but I think it may not be relevant to all use cases.
So my question is if an option to disable the clearing of internal buffers in mbedtls_config.h would be a reasonable improvement? Or would that be considered to much of a foot gun?
Regards,
Joel Petersson
Hi,
In Embed tls version 2.28, is there any support to validate
client certificate fields like for example: validity of certificate, CA
validation or role extraction ?
If support is present then, how can we enable that ?
Please help me with this.Thanks in advance.
Regards
Anupma
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
hello, we are testing a secure communication and got example code that uses the mbed-tls library. i am using the online keil studio with mbed.org: created a new project (compiles fine) and added in the mbed-tls library but this already gives compile errors. see below. i am using the latest greatest versions (mbed-os 6.16.0 and mbedtls-3.2.1) and tried some older versions. all seem to give the same problems. see below.
i have tried commenting out MBEDTLS_HAVE_TIME in mbedtls_config.h but that does not seem to make any difference
tried different target boards, also no difference
any help is greatly appreciated!
thanks
frank
Build started
Using toolchain ARMC6 profile {'ENV': {'ARMLMD_LICENSE_FILE': '8224@10.10.101.194:8224@10.10.109.222'}, 'PATHS': {'ARMC6_PATH': '/opt/ARMCompiler6.15.13/bin/', 'ARM_PATH': '/opt/armcc5_06_u6/'}, 'common': ['-c', '--gnu', '-O3', '-Otime', '--split_sections', '--apcs=interwork'], 'cxx': ['--cpp', '--no_rtti'], 'COMPILE_C_AS_CPP': False, 'NEW_SCAN_RESOURCES': True}
scan /tmp/chroots/ch-59110c86-ee99-44c4-9ef0-79f3efde74a7/src
scan /tmp/chroots/ch-59110c86-ee99-44c4-9ef0-79f3efde74a7/extras/mbed-os.lib
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Config/RTX_Config.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/TOOLCHAIN_ARM/TARGET_RTOS_M4_M7/irq_cm4f.S
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_evflags.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_lib.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_mempool.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Library/cmsis_os1.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_evr.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_memory.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_delay.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_msgqueue.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_kernel.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_mutex.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_semaphore.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_system.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/Source/os_systick.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/TARGET_CORTEX_M/Source/mbed_tz_context.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_timer.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/Source/os_tick_ptim.c
compile mbed-os/cmsis/CMSIS_5/CMSIS/RTOS2/RTX/Source/rtx_thread.c
"time.h included in a configuration without MBEDTLS_HAVE_TIME"
unknown type name 'time_t'; did you mean 'size_t'?
unknown type name 'time_t'; did you mean 'size_t'?
unknown type name 'time_t'; did you mean 'size_t'?
compile mbed-os/cmsis/device/rtos/source/mbed_rtos_rtx.c
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/cmsis/device/rtos/source/mbed_rtos_rtx.c:23:
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_error.h:21:
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_retarget.h:107:
/src/mbedtls/tests/include/baremetal-override/time.h:18:2: error: "time.h included in a configuration without MBEDTLS_HAVE_TIME"
#error "time.h included in a configuration without MBEDTLS_HAVE_TIME"
^
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/cmsis/device/rtos/source/mbed_rtos_rtx.c:23:
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_error.h:21:
/extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_retarget.h:669:5: error: unknown type name 'time_t'; did you mean 'size_t'?
time_t st_atime; ///< Time of last access
^~~~~~
size_t
/opt/ARMCompiler6.15.13/bin/../include/stdio.h:53:26: note: 'size_t' declared here
typedef unsigned int size_t; /* see <stddef.h> */
^
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/cmsis/device/rtos/source/mbed_rtos_rtx.c:23:
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_error.h:21:
/extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_retarget.h:670:5: error: unknown type name 'time_t'; did you mean 'size_t'?
time_t st_mtime; ///< Time of last data modification
^~~~~~
size_t
/opt/ARMCompiler6.15.13/bin/../include/stdio.h:53:26: note: 'size_t' declared here
typedef unsigned int size_t; /* see <stddef.h> */
^
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/cmsis/device/rtos/source/mbed_rtos_rtx.c:23:
In file included from /extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_error.h:21:
/extras/mbed-os.lib/platform/include/platform/mbed_retarget.h:671:5: error: unknown type name 'time_t'; did you mean 'size_t'?
time_t st_ctime; ///< Time of last status change
^~~~~~
size_t
/opt/ARMCompiler6.15.13/bin/../include/stdio.h:53:26: note: 'size_t' declared here
typedef unsigned int size_t; /* see <stddef.h> */
^
4 errors generated.
Internal error.
Build failed
Build failed
Hi all,
I have some questions.
1) If you have an established TLS connection (mbed TLS 3.x) and while the
connection is up the (server-) certificate expires: Will the connection stay
up? Or is a new handshake (with valid cert) REQUIRED?
2) Related to question 1: CAN mbed TLS switch to a new cert on an existing
TLS connection? (e.g. by doing another handshake from server OR client side)
3) With 3.x some struct members are now "private". Even if you can allow
private access by a define it would be better to use a getter. But for ssl
context's "state" I am missing this and also for "p_bio" (to access fd). Is
there a chance to get this implemented?
BTW - a big "LIKE" for 3.x! I really appreciate the changes. Thank you!
kind regards,
Frank
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is tomorrow (Monday) at 4:30 PM UK time.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi Mbed TLS users,
We have released Mbed TLS version 3.2.1.
This release is functionally identical to 3.2.0, but includes a file that was missing from the 3.2.0 release (see https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6084).
Full details are available in the release notes (https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/v3.2.1).
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
Many thanks,
Mbed TLS Team.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi Mbed TLS users,
We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.2.0 and 2.28.1.
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and for 3.2.0, add various features. Full details are available in the release notes (https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/v3.2.0, https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.28.1).
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
Dave Rodgman
Hi mbed-tls Team,
I notice that https://tls.mbed.org has been directed to https://www.trustedfirmware.org/projects/mbed-tls/. However, I does not see any link to the old Mbed TLS knowledge base. It is a good resource for learning Mbed TLS. What is the URL to access it?
Thanks,
Max Peng
Hi all,
it feels like the state of documentation has deteriorated since the last
time I've used mbedtls (a couple of months ago). I'm not sure if the google
index hasn't fully been updated yet, or I don't understand the new
structure of the docs or ...
Also, is this the proper forum to make suggestions? Should I raise an issue
on Github?
1.) a lot of previously linked, useful information now redirects here:
https://www.trustedfirmware.org/projects/mbed-tls/ which (please excuse my
frankness) feels like an utterly useless abomination that only marketing
people could love.
- Some examples of previously useful links: from the wiki (
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/mbed-tls/) :
> Old Mbed TLS website
> Documentation: Mbed TLS API Reference; Knowledge base; Dev corner
all redirect to trustedfirmware.org ! As do nearly all the links in
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/development/SUPPORT.md
2.) there is no longer an doxygen generated API documentation anywhere
only. I could generate it myself, but then I'd need to get and install
Doxygen, figure how to use it, etc. It would be great if this were
restored. It can't be that expensive to host :)
Anyway, it feels like I've been running around for hours trying to find
_anything_ useful, but I just realized everything is redirected to
trustedfirmware.org ... Is there any way to still access the old, useful
docs?
Thanks & sorry that this post is so negative,
-tim
Hello Sir/Madam,
I am developing TI's EFM32 series micro controller based IOT device. This
device will connect to mqtt broker and publish/ subscribes to/from data.
In my application, I am trying to connect to AWS using mbedtls library over
lwIP (no rtos mode). While my device is in debug mode (i.e. JTAG programmer
connected) then it gets connected to AWS successfully. But when I remove
JTAG programmer and operate device in normal running mode, then it failed to
get connect to broker (i.e. AWS).
I observe following errors occured while performing TLS handshaking stage:
SSL - The connection indicated an EOF
X509 - Certificate verification failed, e.g. CRL, CA or signatur
SSL - Processing of the ServerHello handshake message failed
Hi all,
First of all apologies if this is not the right place for this topic. For my master thesis I am using the mbedtls library to analyze it using side channel analysis.
My objective was to use it as a starting point to analyze the resistance of different exponentiation algorithms.
With this objective I am trying to set up a environment where I can call the function "mbedtls_mpi_exp_mod" https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/f5b7082f6e8af72868966b6ea99eae228f… and debug it. I have been trying for at least two weeks but I couldn't be able to succeed.
I believe that when If I can get a debugging environment for that function I will be able to adapt it and use other exponentiation algorithms such as the Left-to-right k-ary (HAC 14.82).
I am using VScode and the code is located in WLS Ubuntu 20.04. So far I been able to compile the full library and run all the tests.
Anyone here could give mean indication on how to set up the environment to debug this function?
Thanks!
Victor.
Hello,
Currently, we are evaluating the MbedLib to be eventually used in small and midsized automotive ECUs.
* Since we have to follow the UNECE Regulation R155, R156, and ISO/SAE 21434 I need some information regarding the long-term support of the library and how the communication of bugs is organized?
* I also do not understand the involvement and responsibility of ARM company?
* Furthermore, I'm not sure if I understood the terms PSA and MbedTls and their mutual dependencies as well as the technical meaning?
I checked the web for I but did not find anything about it yet.
It would be just great if somebody can give me some hints or links to the information I am looking for.
Regards Heico
I have an application using mbedTls 2.9.0 that's been running successfully for a few years. It secures connections for the AWS MQTT broker, for https GET/PUT transfers, and for SSL/TLS email servers - But only one secure connection at a time. I need to add support for an FTPS client. This requires opening/securing a control channel on port 21, then opening/securing a second port for data transfer.
Opening/securing the control channel works as expected. Then, when the client calls connect() for the data transfer socket, the server log shows messages indicating it is preparing for a TLS handshake.
Now, here's where I may be missing something... The client calls the same code as for the control connection: Allocates a second mbedtls_ssl_context, mbedtls_ssl_config, mbedtls_x509_crt, et.al, and calls some mbedtls_ssl_*() functions which were copy/pasted from example code several years ago. The server name and root cert are the same. I think the only difference in the second negotiation is the underlying socket descriptor allocated by the IP stack for the data channel.
When mbedtls_ssl_handshake() is called, both the filezilla log and client log show a successful handshake. The filezilla log then shows it trying to establish yet another secure data connection, which fails, and reports "TLS session of data connection not resumed."
Questions:
-- Is the above sequence correct for opening and securing a second connection?
-- In searching through ssl.h I see mbedtls_ssl_get_session() and mbedtls_ssl_set_session(). Are these relevant to the situation? I cannot tell from their one-sentence descriptions.
Hi
I just needed to use rsa.c but its a little complicated.
Can anyone help me or give me any document about how i can use it without use of tls.
I just saw a doc on tls.mbed.org but the site is not working anymore.
Hello,
currently, I am evaluating the mbed-tls. I already created some smaller demos regarding AES and RSA. I do so on a PC with cygwin and with Keil micro vision for a NXP S32K144.
One demo is just validating some data with a signature and an existing public key. Here is the point that puzzles me a bit. As far as I understand this cybersecurity stuff entropy is not needed for the above use case. Some of my colleagues would agree with me.
Once psa_crypto_init() is called on a target NXP S32K144 the function returns PSA_ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_ENTROPY.
So far so good
https://os.mbed.com/docs/mbed-os/v6.15/porting/entropy-sources.html
gives the hints on how to handle this in general but I did not find any information on how to disable the "request for entropy" in a save way once your use case does not need any new secrets.
Can you give me a hint why psa_crypto_init() is implemented that way?
It may also be that I still have a conceptual understanding problem!?
Regards
Heico
Hi mbed-tls Team,
PSA crypto API for HW acceleration seems pretty new.
Question1: is there some reference code or project I could poke around to see how it is being used?
Currently I have added (locally) a set of driver to make use of our HW crypto using the *_ALT way (the old way?) and for what I understand, the PSA API is the "new way" to do things.
But It is still unclear how vendor do upstream there HW acceleration drivers.
If this part is kept in another repo, then the mbedTLS build does not have any "hooks" to pull-in the vendor specific code to build the mbedTLS library with.
The current implementation seems to be agnostic to any vendor specific HW so I am wondering if there is a "standard" way for vendor to upstream their mbedTLS HW acceleration code that would be built as part of mbedTLS library.
I have posted a similar thread to the "issue" ticket of the mbedtls repo for reference: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/5975
Thanks for any feedback/pointers/ideas.
Regards,
-Mathieu
Hi All,
My target has 128k SRAM which has about 60k spare, and 64k CCM which
is allocated whole to FreeRTOS stacks etc (its private heap, memory
model #4).
I am running a simplified HTTP server (for local config etc), which
uses fairly minimal RAM (a few k), and an HTTPS/TLS client which uses
about 50k (for its private heap).
So if both of the above are running concurrently, there is only ~10k
RAM left, but it does work, but when TLS is doing its
handshake/negotiation (which on a 168MHz 32F417 takes 2-3 seconds) the
HTTP server temporarily hangs.
Investigating this, it appears that LWIP is running out of buffers
during TLS and is rejecting incoming packets.
I don't really want to change the CPU to the next one up which has
another 64k RAM, because a) I have stock of the 417 and this took
about a year to get, b) the design is rock solid and I don't want to
tempt fate (there is a lot of subtle hardware usage e.g. DAC ADC DMA
timers) even though in theory it should be just alternate function pin
changes, c) some versions of the product may not need TLS at all.
I have an option of an 8 megabyte SPI-attached RAM
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/lyontek-ly68l6400-8-megabyte…
which does work and is not bad at $3 (there are cheaper 128kbyte
versions too), but obviously cannot be addressed as normal RAM. The
ESP32 can do that but the 32F4 can't.
Does anyone know enough about the internals of MbedTLS, or even LWIP,
to know whether the memory usage structure lends itself to this kind
of "overlay" memory? One can read or write say 1k bytes in 400us, in
my target (21MHz SPI with DMA). Obviously this would be horribly
inefficient for a byte at a time emulation but perhaps one can switch
buffers in and out...
Thank you in advance. If somebody knows of a concrete route, I am
happy to pay for the time.
Regards,
Peter
Hi All, This is a gentle reminder that the next MBed TLS Tech forum is next
Monday 4:30 PM UK time. If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman
know. :) Best regards, Don
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Monday Jul 4, 2022 ⋅ 8:30am – 9:30am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
nnac123(a)gmail.com
Hi all,
We're seeking feedback on our plans regarding support for Finite-Field DHE (also known as FFDH(E), as opposed to the Elliptic Curve version, ECDH(E)).
Currently the PSA Crypto API only supports FFDH with named groups, which aligns well with modern cryptographic practice and the needs of TLS 1.3, but less well with TLS 1.2 where arbitrary parameters can be chosen by the server, leading to various interoperability and security issues (see the introduction of RFC 7919, hence the general move to named groups).
Some data suggests that FFDH is already seeing very little use (less than 1% of TLS 1.2 traffic) on major websites, and presumably this would be even less when constrained devices are involved, since ECDH is less resource-intensive.
So, we are currently planning on removing support for DHE-RSA and DHE-PSK key exchanges in TLS 1.2 in the next major version of Mbed TLS. We would retain support of ECDHE in TLS 1.2, and of DHE (in addition to ECDHE) in TLS 1.3. (Support for FFDH in TLS 1.2 would also be present in the LTS version released around the same time as the next major version.)
If you have any objection to this plan, please let us know about your use case and motivations, either by responding to this email, or by commenting on the corresponding github issue: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/5278 Thank you!
Best regards,
Manuel for the Mbed TLS team.
Hi,
I have one root ca, intermediate ca, and device certificate in der format.
While am trying to verify one by one as intermediate-ca with root-ca and device cert with intermediate-ca; things work fine.
But if I tried to verify like having two context one for ca and one chain. I parse root ca on CA context and intermediate ca and device cert on chain context. Now verification fails with flag 8 error code -0x2700.
I have attached verify_der_one_by_one.c it is working without any issue; but verify_der_chain.c is causing the issue stated above.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
Hello,
Mbed TLS supports AES acceleration with VIA Padlock (MBEDTLS_PADLOCK_C).
We do not have the hardware to test it, so this should be considered
strictly community-maintained.
We are making a patch to the AES module which has a small risk of
breaking VIA padlock support:
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/pull/5896 . If you are using VIA
padlock, please test this change and let us know if something's wrong.
On a related note, we intend to drop the Padlock code in the next major
version of Mbed TLS (https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/5903).
If you care about this feature, please let us know.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hi all,
I'm using an mbedTLS server on a CPU with a small memory foot print. In a search to serve as many as possible TLS clients, I found that the mbedtls_ssl_session.master[48] structure member is still in memory after the handshake is over.
(I filed an issue to start with, but was quickly directed to this mailing list, thanks to Tom Cosgrove. See Clear master secret from mbedtls_ssl_session after handshake is ready * Issue #5832 * Mbed-TLS/mbedtls (github.com)<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/5832>)
I'm wondering why this is needed. The `master` secret references I can find in the code are either related to the TLS handshake, or to serialization/deserialization. I am wondering whether it makes sense to serialize/deserialize the master secret but I'm not sure if it is a use case to support serialization of ongoing handshake operations.
Based on this 2 questions:
* Is the master secret relevant when the handshake is over?
* Is the master secret really useful in serialization/deserialization? If so, I could use `MBEDTLS_SSL_CONTEXT_SERIALIZATION` in my eventual merge request to keep facilitating this.
Looking forward for relevant answers. Thanks in advance,
Maarten
You have been invited to the following event.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Every 4 weeks from 2am to 2:50am on Monday 20 times Mountain Standard
Time - Phoenix
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
* schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MzE1cHJuZGxwMDFo…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the next MBed TLS Tech forum is next Monday at
4:30pm UK time.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi,
I am using mbedTLS v3.0.0 on a low performance CPU on a non-threaded environment, a custom task manager, which is not a preemptive operating system.
I have been using MBEDTLS_ECP_RESTARTABLE so even the long ECC calculations during the handshake periodically returned so the external logic and task manager could run without being blocked for too long.
Recently an IoT SAFE implementation was introduced through PSA API. It is used for RNG and verification calculation, but not for ECDSA and ECDH during key exchange.
PSA API is designed for threaded environments and can not simultaneously use MBEDTLS_ECP_RESTARTABLE. Now the ECC functions block for several seconds.
Do you have a recommendation on how to use PSA on non-threaded environments, or how to inject external logic execution during these long ECC operations?
Thanks,
Gergely
Hi,
I am using mbedTLS v3.0.0 on a low performance CPU on a non-threaded
environment, a custom task manager, which is not a preemptive operating
system.
I have been using MBEDTLS_ECP_RESTARTABLE so even the long ECC calculations
during the handshake periodically returned so the external logic and task
manager could run without being blocked for too long.
Recently an IoT SAFE implementation was introduced through PSA API. It is
used for RNG and verification calculation, but not for ECDSA and ECDH
during key exchange.
PSA API is designed for threaded environments and can not simultaneously
use MBEDTLS_ECP_RESTARTABLE. Now the ECC functions block for several
seconds.
Do you have a recommendation on how to use PSA on non-threaded
environments, or how to inject external logic execution during these long
ECC operations?
Thanks,
Gergely
Hi all,
I can see a "RAW RSA" encoding method for signatures both implemented in mbed TLS and PSA API and I'm wondering about the motivations and rational of this variant.
Could you tell more about it, please ?
Below details.
Thierry
It was introduced since 2017 in mbed TLS in this sha1 ID : fdf38030de70b95a77205f17d65591f05e74be08 ("Outsource code for generating PKCS1 v1.5 encoding").
As far as I know, standard does not specifically mention it but
RFC 8017 ($9.2) specifies EMSA-PKCS1-v1_5 as a deterministic encoding method (no randomness) with a buffer that is built as an encoded message EM = 0x00 || 0x01 || PS || 0x00 || T,
where
PS being padding bytes,
T being a DER encoding of a digestInfo,
where digestInfo contains :
- the hash function
(so called AlgorithmIdentifier applied on the message)
- and the hash value
(so called digest H = = Hash(M))
PSA defines the RAW RSA in its API. It is said a signature algorithm, without hashing.
In this raw RSA PKCS#1 v1.5, the hash parameter to psa_sign_hash is computed "externally". It is a DER encoding, “ready-to-use" hash, so called raw data in PSA and mbed TLS.
In the RSA PKCS#1 v1.5, the hash parameter to psa_sign_hash is H (computed with the hash function as indicated in the standard).
mbed TLS implementation manages RAW data in rsa_rsassa_pkcs1_v15_encode(), it copies raw data as they are given and pads accordingly.
Even if from a security perspective, this variant does not seem to introduce vulnerabilities, there is no information on the used hash algorithm inside the signature itself, therefore making mandatory for the verifier to know exactly which algorithm is used, and therefore less trivial in term of device interoperability.
This event has been cancelled.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: United Kingdom Time
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin- creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
* schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively, you can sign up for a Google Account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organiser and be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
This event has been changed.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Every 4 weeks from 21:00 to 21:50 on Monday from Mon 31 Jan to Mon 23
May Eastern Australia Time - Sydney (changed)
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin- creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
* schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MmU4dm1iNzJ0dmV1…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively, you can sign up for a Google Account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organiser and be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
This event has been changed.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Every 4 weeks from 19:00 to 19:50 on Monday 13 times Eastern
Australia Time - Sydney (changed)
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin- creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
* schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MmU4dm1iNzJ0dmV1…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively, you can sign up for a Google Account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organiser and be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi Subramanian.
Thank you for your report. Would it be possible to provide some further information on how the program is structured? Is the code snippet running in a single thread or a multithreaded application? How often is data transmitted (As to many invocations are we considering for an 8-hour window)? How is that while(1) loop interrupted? Which platform architecture is the program running at?
I have been trying to reproduce it by expanding the Valgrind test suite, as to repeat the logic included in the example for UINT_MAX iterations, without success.
Minos
________________________________
From: Subramanian Gopi Krishnan via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 16 March 2022 04:24
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] AES Memory Leak
Hi,
I have developed a program to send encrypted data continuously. The program is working fine for few hours. After 6 to 8 Hrs, I get returned
MBEDTLS_ERR_CIPHER_ALLOC_FAILED -0x6180
Do I need to free the gcm context for every time I send data? What would be the root cause.
#define AEAD_KEY_SIZE (32) /**< AEAD Key Size(in bytes). */
#define AEAD_IV_SIZE (12) /**< AEAD IV Size(in bytes). */
#define AEAD_AD_SIZE (16) /**< AEAD AAD Size(in bytes). */
#define AEAD_TAG_SIZE (16) /**< AEAD Tag Size(in bytes). */
#define AEAD_ID_SIZE (4) /**< AEAD Tag Size(in bytes). */
#define MAX_CIPHER_SIZE (2048)/**< AEAD Cipher/Plaintext Segent Size unoperation(in bytes). */
typedef struct
{
mbedtls_gcm_context CtxAead; /**< aes-gcm 3rd party library context */
uint8_t pu8Key[AEAD_KEY_SIZE]; /**< Key - Randomly Generated */
uint8_t pu8InitVector[AEAD_IV_SIZE]; /**< Randomly Generated */
uint8_t pu8AddData[AEAD_AD_SIZE]; /**< Additional Associated Data - md5sum() */
uint8_t pu8Tag[AEAD_TAG_SIZE]; /**< Hold Digest/Tag of encryped data */
uint8_t pu8Id[AEAD_ID_SIZE]; /**< KeyID is generated */
uint8_t pu8Data[MAX_CIPHER_SIZE]; /**< Buffer to hold plain-text after decipher */
uint8_t pu8Cipher[MAX_CIPHER_SIZE]; /**< Buffer to hold cipher-text after cipher */
uint16_t u16Length; /**< Current length of buffer to encrypt/decrypt */
}S_Aead;
int32_t i32Aead_EncryptionCycle(S_Aead *ctx ,uint8_t *pu8AddData, uint16_t u16Length )
{
int32_t i32Ret = 0;
if(NULL == ctx)
{
return (NULL_AEAD_CTX);
}
/* Initilaze GCM Context
**/
mbedtls_gcm_init ( &(ctx->CtxAead) );
/*SETTING ADDITIONAL DATA as MD5 of incoming data
**/
if( AEAD_AD_SIZE < u16Length )
{
return (ERROR_INPUT_BUFFER_TOO_LONG);
}
memset( ctx->pu8AddData, 0x00, AEAD_AD_SIZE );
i32Ret = mbedtls_md5_ret(pu8AddData,
u16Length,
ctx->pu8AddData);
if (i32Ret)
{
return (i32Ret);
}
/* symetric key for testing */
memset( ctx->pu8Key, 0xAB, AEAD_KEY_SIZE )
/* Setting the key */
if( i32Ret = mbedtls_gcm_setkey ( &(ctx->CtxAead),
MBEDTLS_CIPHER_ID_AES,
ctx->pu8Key,
AEAD_KEY_SIZE*OCTETS ) )
{
return (i32Ret);
}
while(1)
{
/* OS Wait for 1000ms for data to get ready */
if( OS_WaitSingleEventTimed( TX_DATA_BUFFER_READY, WAIT_1000MS ) )
{
if( ctx->u16Length == 0 )
{
/* No data ready for sending (or) timed-out */;
continue;
}
/* New Initial Vector */
if( i32Ret = i32NewRandomByte( ctx->pu8InitVector, AEAD_IV_SIZE,
"AEAD_NEW_IV_GENERATION" ) )
{
return(i32Ret);
}
ctx->u16Length = u16Length;
if( i32Ret = mbedtls_gcm_crypt_and_tag( &(ctx->CtxAead), MBEDTLS_GCM_ENCRYPT,
ctx->u16Length,
ctx->pu8InitVector, AEAD_IV_SIZE,
ctx->pu8AddData, AEAD_AD_SIZE,
ctx->pu8Data, ctx->pu8Cipher,
AEAD_TAG_SIZE, ctx->pu8Tag))
{
return(i32Ret);
}
if( ctx->u16Length == send_data(ctx->pu8Cipher, ctx->u16Length) )
{
/* tx success*/
memset( ctx->pu8Data, 0x00, ctx->u16Length );
memset( ctx->pu8Cipher, 0x00, ctx->u16Length );
ctx->u16Length = 0;
}
}
}
/* Free GCM Context */
mbedtls_gcm_free( &(ctx->CtxAead) );
/* Reset context memory */
memset(ctx, 0, sizeof(S_Aead));
}
Hi,
Is there anyone who can tell me how to send the question related to MbedTLS? Which forum can I sign in?
Thanks,
Christie
-----Original Message-----
From: mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: April-25-22 8:00 PM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: mbed-tls Digest, Vol 26, Issue 5
Send mbed-tls mailing list submissions to
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
mbed-tls-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of mbed-tls digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. misc. questions (Frank Bergmann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 12:47:07 +0200
From: Frank Bergmann <mbedtls(a)tuxad.com>
Subject: [mbed-tls] misc. questions
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Message-ID: <20220425104707.GA3579(a)treferpol.tuxad.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi all,
I have some questions.
1) If you have an established TLS connection (mbed TLS 3.x) and while the connection is up the (server-) certificate expires: Will the connection stay up? Or is a new handshake (with valid cert) REQUIRED?
2) Related to question 1: CAN mbed TLS switch to a new cert on an existing TLS connection? (e.g. by doing another handshake from server OR client side)
3) With 3.x some struct members are now "private". Even if you can allow private access by a define it would be better to use a getter. But for ssl context's "state" I am missing this and also for "p_bio" (to access fd). Is there a chance to get this implemented?
BTW - a big "LIKE" for 3.x! I really appreciate the changes. Thank you!
kind regards,
Frank
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
mbed-tls mailing list -- mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
------------------------------
End of mbed-tls Digest, Vol 26, Issue 5
***************************************
Hi All, A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBest TLS
Tech forum is next Monday. If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman
know. :) Best regards, Don
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Mon Apr 25, 2022 2am – 2:50am Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
* schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
Hey friends
Im trying to do a secure connection between my stm32 board and server.
I wrote the code based on GitHub - eziya/STM32F4_HAL_ETH_MBEDTLS: STM32 mbedTLS library testing (SSL/TLS client) that i found.
My board is based on stm32h7 series.
And im using google to test my app.(ip 142.250.74.196 port 443)
This is the debug section:
https://aws1.discourse-cdn.com/standard17/uploads/mbed/original/2X/e/ee636c…
How should i solve the problem?
Greetings!
I'm having an issue while veryfing signature with imported RSA2048
public key, generated with Win7 CryptoAPI (PUBLICKEYBLOB) into latest
mbedtls 2.28.x.
The blob contains RSA modulus N (256 bytes) and public exponent E (4
bytes) - I do extract them succesfully, then provide into
mbedtls_rsa_import_raw. It all goes smth. like this:
u32 errval = mbedtls_rsa_init(ctx, MBEDTLS_RSA_PKCS_V15, 0);
// errval == 0 here
errval = mbedtls_rsa_import_raw(ctx, n, nlen, 0l, 0, 0l, 0, 0l, 0, e, elen);
// errval == 0 here
errval = mbedtls_rsa_complete(ctx);
// errval == 0 here
errval = mbedtls_rsa_check_pubkey(ctx);
// errval == 0 here
Then i ran:
errval = mbedtls_rsa_pkcs1_verify(ctx, 0l, 0l, MBEDTLS_RSA_PUBLIC,
MBEDTLS_MD_SHA512, 0, _src,
_sign);
and get -0x4380 (verify failed)
_src - is sha512 hash of data to be verified (64 bytes)
_sign - is 256 bytes of signature, provided by win7 cryptoapi
P.S. just in case, i did tried messing with endianess in every way for e
AND n, it didn't help.
I added a little debugging inside library/rsa.cpp, turned out we do call
mbedtls_rsa_rsassa_pkcs1_v15_verify,
and there is a memcmp between 'encoded' and 'encoded_expected' bufs.
'encoded' is derived from signature (_sign), and 'encoded_expected' is
derived from hash (_src)
printhex for 'encoded' looks like this:
1a1da83b 14be17a2 c8401d41 1d453909
...
total 16 lines (256 bytes)
...
7fb37ea2 719a5562 aebdb3ed 296e0ed1
but printhex for 'encoded_expected' looks like this:
ffff0100 ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
...
wtf??? padding ???
...
ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff 30513000
6009060d 65014886 03020403 40040005
b190b45a a40b354f 32271b34 f022abd3
... sha512-derived data here, 64 bytes
557abf2b e2cc4e0f 0b77bdfc b45688b0
So, there is no way these two bufs match. I wonded if there is some
issue in parsing _sign, or I didn't prepared input data good enough.
Any ideas?
B.R.,
m4D.
I am trying to modify the dtls_server.c example to keep track of whether session caching was used for a given connection.
Ideally I would have an interget value i.e `session_resumed = #1 or 0`
One way I tried to do this was by reading the value of the mbedtls_ssl_context struct `ssl`:
```
/*
* 5. Handshake
*/
do ret = mbedtls_ssl_handshake( &ssl );
while( ret == MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_WANT_READ || ret == MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_WANT_WRITE );
if( ret == MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_HELLO_VERIFY_REQUIRED ) {
printf( " hello verification requested\n" );
ret = 0;
goto reset;
}
else if( ret != 0 ) {
printf( " failed\n ! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x%x\n\n", (unsigned int) -ret );
goto reset;
}
printf( " session cache status: %d\n", ssl.handshake.resume );
```
The issue with this is that the ssl struct is set to private, so the code fails to compile with the error: 'struct mbedtls_ssl_context' has no member named 'handshake'
Can somebody help me with some example code that would make this possible?
Hi all,
Please note that in the next couple of weeks, we will migrate Mbed TLS to a new GitHub organisation. Your existing scripts, links etc for accessing Mbed TLS on GitHub should not be affected.
This will change the url from https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls to https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls . GitHub will redirect any accesses to the old URL for the foreseeable future, but we would recommend updating your links once the migration is complete.
All of the Mbed TLS repositories will migrate to this new organisation, i.e.:
mbedtls
mbedtls-docs
mbedtls-test
Thanks
Dave Rodgman
Hello,
mbedTLS has ECDSA module that takes Signature with ASN1 encoding as input
mbedtls_pk_verify()
The Signature I receive is without ASN1 encoded.
Trying to find an implementation within mbedTLS that can add ASN1 to signature before I feed into the verify function.
Any help ?
[RF IDeas]<http://www.rfideas.com/>
Deep Patel
Sr. Embedded Software Engineer
D:
224-333-2084
P:
847-870-1723 Ext 437
E:
ddpatel(a)rfideas.com<mailto:ddpatel@rfideas.com>
A: <https://www.rfideas.com/>
425 North Martingale Road, Suite 1680, Schaumburg, IL 60173
<https://www.rfideas.com/>
Hi All,
Please find the link to the TrustedFirmware Community Code of Conduct here:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_guidelines/…
Trusted Firmware has a very diverse and global developer community. It is
important that we adhere to the code of conduct in all our interactions.
For some of you all this may be new and for others just a gentle reminder.
In either case, if you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to
me directly.
And thanks to you all for your contributions to the TrustedFirmware
community!
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello!
Is there a time plan for when there will be an official release with TLS 1.3 (Client) that supports mutual authentication?
Kind Regards
Tove Rumar
Software Engineer
u-blox Malmo
Östra Varvsgatan 4
SE- Malmö
www.u-blox.com<https://www.u-blox.com>
Reliable. Smart. Secure.
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello,
we are using mbedTLS version 2.16.
We are facing a problem in verifying the signed message for ECDSA type of
algorithms. Do you have any sample code for this as given for the RSA type
algorithm in rsa_verify.c.
We have derived the R and S values and their length, but we are not sure
which context to use to verify the signature.
Please help urgently.
--
Regards,
Sunil Jain
Hi thanks for getting back to me,
That's fine if it doesn't work in future releases, I will most likely stay
on 3.0.0.
Unfortunately when trying to add this line to the dtls_server example I get:
error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
'mbedtls_ssl_handshake_params' {aka 'struct mbedtls_ssl_handshake_params'}
int resumed = ssl.MBEDTLS_PRIVATE(handshake)->resume;
^~
my use case for this is to test a client's ability to connect to the server
and use session caching, I want to essentially send messages to the server
from a client, and have the server send a message back either 'session
cache was used' or 'session cache was not used'.
Good afternoon, I'm trying to implement TLS 1.2. for MMS using the library libiec61850. When a connection is established, the interaction is interrupted at the stage "Client Key Exchange".
Also, when monitoring the interaction through wireshark, I see that an error is displayed at the "Certificate Request" stage. I use default certificates, the project is built through CMake on Windows and TLS 1.1. works flawlessly. In the file tls_mbedtls.c I changed only the values of the minimum and maximum versions to TLS 1.2.
Thank you in advance for your response.
Hi All, A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBest TLS
Tech forum is next Monday. If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman
know. :) Best regards, Don
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Mon Feb 28, 2022 3am – 3:50am Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
Hi Dmitrij,
(Please note, I've moved this question to the main Mbed TLS list as this is the right place for this kind of question).
I've tested our example ssl_client2 against test.mosquitto.org, using a client certificate & key generated via https://test.mosquitto.org/ssl/index.php, and CA file from https://test.mosquitto.org/. This connects properly using the command line:
./ssl_client2 server_addr=test.mosquitto.org server_port=8884 ca_file=mosquitto.org.crt server_name=test.mosquitto.org crt_file=client.crt key_file=client.key
Similarly, OpenSSL succeeds using the same certificates:
openssl s_client -connect test.mosquitto.org:8884 -CAfile mosquitto.org.crt -servername test.mosquitto.org -cert client.crt -key client.key
However, if I omit the client key (i.e. remove "-key client.key"), Mbed TLS fails in the manner you describe. It looks like you are not supplying the client key?
Regards
Dave Rodgman
On 21/02/2022, 10:55, "Dmitrij Shabroff via Mbed-tls-announce via mbed-tls" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
Good day
Please answer my questions - there is very little literature on the topic. I do not know what to do.
I have dealt with the message [2:40] issue. I did not enroll the user certificate using:
if((ret = mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert(&conf, &clicert, &pkey))!= 0)
and this certificate was not transmitted. Now I have taken it a step further, the certificate is successfully transferred and the server does not break the connection. I switched to TLS 1.3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But in your examples, I see the use of two certificates:
mbedtls_ssl_conf_ca_chain( &conf, &cacert, NULL );
ret = mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert( &conf, &clicert, &pkey ) )
And also the key:
ret = mbedtls_pk_parse_key( &pkey,
(const unsigned char *) mbedtls_test_cli_key,
mbedtls_test_cli_key_len, NULL, 0, rng_get, &rng );
In my version, I only have a client certificate. I working with https://test.mosquitto.org/
Would you advise where to get the missing certificates and where to get the key for the mbedtls_pk_parse_key function?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now in both functions I use the same certificate and a PCA key from the example. I get a message:
..\Src\mbedTLS\library\ssl_msg.c:4645:got an alert message, type: [2:51]
..\Src\mbedTLS\library\ssl_msg.c:4653:is a fatal alert message (msg 51)
..\Src\mbedTLS\library\ssl_msg.c:3763:mbedtls_ssl_handle_message_type() returned -30592 (-0x7780)
..\Src\mbedTLS\library\ssl_msg.c:4771:mbedtls_ssl_read_record() returned -30592 (-0x7780)
Sincerely,
Shabrov Dmitry
>Понедельник, 7 февраля 2022, 16:28 +03:00 от B Mahesh via Mbed-tls-announce via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>:
>
>Hi ,
>
>
>
>*Problem description :*
>
>
>
>Trying to run example
>https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/master/programs/ssl/ssl_server2.c .
>
>Updated ssl_server2 port to listen on 7777 for incoming client request
>,ssl_server2
>will be waiting for remote connection continuously.
>
>There was no client request for connection on this port, but still server
>is getting some spurious connection request and goes for handshake and
>fails with below error code.
>
>
>
>Error code: mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned error -30976
>
>
>
>
>*Steps to reproduce: =============*
>
> 1. start ssl_server2 program
> 2. Monitor for ssl_server2 connection waiting , observe ssl_server2 will
> accept spurious connection request and goes for handshake and fails
>with above
> mentioned error code.
>
>
>
>*Expected behavior:*
>ssl_server2 wait for remote connection infinitely and connect to valid
>client request and perform handshake every time.
>
>
>*Actual behavior:*
>Occasionally ssl_server2 will accept spurious connection request and goes
>for handshake and fails with below error code.
>
>
>
>Error code:
>mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned error -30976 on ssl_server2
>
>
>
>*Analysis:*
>
>As per below logs what we understand is ssl_server2 will accept spurious
>connection request and goes for handshake and fails with error code
>-30796 ,MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_BAD_HS_CLIENT_HELLO
>on ssl_server2 side .
>
>
>
>Can you please help us to understand this behavior?
>
>What could be the reason for ssl_server2 to connect to a spurious
>connection request?, as mentioned above there was no client request for
>connection on this ssl_server2 port( 7777) .
>
>We have tried this on other SERVER_PORT as well .
>
>
>
>*Logs Snippet:*
>
>*==========*
>
>
>
>. Seeding the random number generator... ok
>
> . Loading the CA root certificate ... ok (0 skipped)
>
> . Loading the server cert. and key... ok
>
> . Bind on tcp://*:7777/ ... ok
>
> . Setting up the SSL/TLS structure... ok
>
> . Waiting for a remote connection ...ok
>
> . Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... failed
>
> ! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x7900
>
>
>
>Last error was: -30976 - SSL - Processing of the ClientHello handshake
>message failed
>
>
>
> . Waiting for a remote connection ... ok
>
> . Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... failed
>
> ! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x7900
>
>
>
>Last error was: -30976 - SSL - Processing of the ClientHello handshake
>message failed
>
>
>
> . Waiting for a remote connection ... ok
>
> . Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... failed
>
> ! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x7900
>
>
>
>Last error was: -30976 - SSL - Processing of the ClientHello handshake
>message failed
>
>
>
>Regards
>Mahesh
>--
>Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>--
>mbed-tls mailing list -- mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
--
mbed-tls mailing list -- mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi,
I am evaluating TLS PSK capability on mbedlts-2.16.12 by running following command. I modified TLS client to have only PSK and removed all private key and certificate related code. However, the servier indicated x.509 verification ok. What is it?
./a.out
ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... ok
[ Protocol is TLSv1.2 ]
[ Ciphersuite is TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256 ]
[ Record expansion is 29 ]
. Closing the connection... done
./ssl_server2 psk="AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" psk_list="Client_identity","AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" force_ciphersuite=TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256
. Seeding the random number generator... ok
. Loading the CA root certificate ... ok (0 skipped)
. Loading the server cert. and key... ok
. Bind on tcp://*:4433/ ... ok
. Setting up the SSL/TLS structure... ok
. Waiting for a remote connection ... ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... ok
[ Protocol is TLSv1.2 ]
[ Ciphersuite is TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256 ]
[ Record expansion is 29 ]
[ Maximum fragment length is 16384 ]
. Verifying peer X.509 certificate... ok
< Read from client: 34 bytes read
GET / HTTP/1.0
Extra-header:
> Write to client: 144 bytes written in 1 fragments
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
<h2>mbed TLS Test Server</h2>
<p>Successful connection using: TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256</p>
. Closing the connection... done
. Waiting for a remote connection ...
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
Hi Gopi,
When you say "I modified TLS client to have only PSK and removed all private key and certificate related code." did you set the C processor directives in the include/mbedtls/mbedtls_config.h file?
To me it seems that you didn't do this and hence you still use the default configuration settings, which means that all PKI-related code is compiled into your binary.
Ciao
Hannes
From: Subramanian Gopi Krishnan via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 12:15 PM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] TLS PSK display X.509 verified
Hi,
I am evaluating TLS PSK capability on mbedlts-2.16.12 by running following command. I modified TLS client to have only PSK and removed all private key and certificate related code. However, the servier indicated x.509 verification ok. What is it?
./a.out
ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... ok
[ Protocol is TLSv1.2 ]
[ Ciphersuite is TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256 ]
[ Record expansion is 29 ]
. Closing the connection... done
./ssl_server2 psk="AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" psk_list="Client_identity","AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" force_ciphersuite=TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256
. Seeding the random number generator... ok
. Loading the CA root certificate ... ok (0 skipped)
. Loading the server cert. and key... ok
. Bind on tcp://*:4433/ ... ok
. Setting up the SSL/TLS structure... ok
. Waiting for a remote connection ... ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... ok
[ Protocol is TLSv1.2 ]
[ Ciphersuite is TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256 ]
[ Record expansion is 29 ]
[ Maximum fragment length is 16384 ]
. Verifying peer X.509 certificate... ok
< Read from client: 34 bytes read
GET / HTTP/1.0
Extra-header:
> Write to client: 144 bytes written in 1 fragments
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
<h2>mbed TLS Test Server</h2>
<p>Successful connection using: TLS-PSK-WITH-AES-128-GCM-SHA256</p>
. Closing the connection... done
. Waiting for a remote connection ...
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
Hi ,
*Problem description :*
Trying to run example
https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/master/programs/ssl/ssl_server2.c .
Updated ssl_server2 port to listen on 7777 for incoming client request
,ssl_server2
will be waiting for remote connection continuously.
There was no client request for connection on this port, but still server
is getting some spurious connection request and goes for handshake and
fails with below error code.
Error code: mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned error -30976
*Steps to reproduce: =============*
1. start ssl_server2 program
2. Monitor for ssl_server2 connection waiting , observe ssl_server2 will
accept spurious connection request and goes for handshake and fails
with above
mentioned error code.
*Expected behavior:*
ssl_server2 wait for remote connection infinitely and connect to valid
client request and perform handshake every time.
*Actual behavior:*
Occasionally ssl_server2 will accept spurious connection request and goes
for handshake and fails with below error code.
Error code:
mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned error -30976 on ssl_server2
*Analysis:*
As per below logs what we understand is ssl_server2 will accept spurious
connection request and goes for handshake and fails with error code
-30796 ,MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_BAD_HS_CLIENT_HELLO
on ssl_server2 side .
Can you please help us to understand this behavior?
What could be the reason for ssl_server2 to connect to a spurious
connection request?, as mentioned above there was no client request for
connection on this ssl_server2 port( 7777) .
We have tried this on other SERVER_PORT as well .
*Logs Snippet:*
*==========*
. Seeding the random number generator... ok
. Loading the CA root certificate ... ok (0 skipped)
. Loading the server cert. and key... ok
. Bind on tcp://*:7777/ ... ok
. Setting up the SSL/TLS structure... ok
. Waiting for a remote connection ...ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... failed
! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x7900
Last error was: -30976 - SSL - Processing of the ClientHello handshake
message failed
. Waiting for a remote connection ... ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... failed
! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x7900
Last error was: -30976 - SSL - Processing of the ClientHello handshake
message failed
. Waiting for a remote connection ... ok
. Performing the SSL/TLS handshake... failed
! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x7900
Last error was: -30976 - SSL - Processing of the ClientHello handshake
message failed
Regards
Mahesh
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi,
I have ported mbedtls library on am embedded platform developed to encrypt / decrypt messages using AES GCM 256 key. After several hours of running, we are experiencing error MBEDTLS_ERR_CIPHER_ALLOC_FAILED 0x6180 and malloc functions fails as the heap seems to be piled-up.
How could I is using correct free function and the actual allocated memory is freed?
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
All,
Not sure if this is the right audience (If it is not let me know if there is a better place to ask the following question)
We have been looking at future security requirements for CPE devices, and we think that we need the following functionality that is currently not really available in the current crypto libraries.
- Support for Quantum computing secure algorithms (Post Quantum of PQ algorithms)
- Support for Hybrid keys ( PQ plus Classic algorithm), preferable in any configuration.
- Modularized public key crypto algorithms implementation, to simplify adding new algorithms
- Updating public key architecture to simplify off-loading private key operations to a Trusted Execution environment or other security HW.
We initially looked at openssl, but found the openssl difficult to work with, so we decided to look at Mbedtls, which has a more lightweight design.
We modified the mbedtls 'pkey' code to make it more modularized (building on the pkwrap design), and added to support for Hybrid keys, which was relatively easy to do.
Updating the TLS library to support hybrid keys has however been a big challenge. The TLS code is very interwoven with the 'pkey' code, and seems to have almost unique implementation for each type of key, making it difficult to follow and modify. Adding support for other (PQ) algorithms within that design will be challenge.
Before spending too much time on this we would like to know if there is an interest in the MBEDTLS community for a redesign of the code to support hybrid keys, PQ algorithms and modularized public key architecture.
Thanks,
Robert
E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or storage of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited.
Hi All, A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBest TLS
Tech forum is next Monday. If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman
know. :) Best regards, Don
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
When: Mon Feb 14, 2022 9:30am – 10:30am Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
Hello,
I am evaluating the mbedTLS library and trying to create a build with Visual Studio 2010, but I am encountering errors. Below are the steps I have taken:
1. Downloaded "mbedtls-3.1.0.zip" and extracted the contents to my Windows 10 computer.
2. Run Visual Studio 2010 and open the solution "mbedTLS.sln" in the folder "mbedtls-3.1.0\visualc\VS2010".
3. Select the "mbedTLS" project and select "Rebuild Only mbedTLS". This is for the Release configuration targeting Win32.
4. During the build process multiple errors are encounter, which seem to be related to Visual Studio's limited C Compiler support. The build output is attached.
Am I missing any steps for configuring the solution or project? I was under the impression that mbedTLS offered support for compiling with Visual Studio 2010? Any help that you can provide would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Murray Shirley, P.Eng.
MicroSurvey Software, Inc.
(250) 707-0000
murray.shirley(a)microsurvey.com<mailto:murray.shirley@microsurvey.com>
Hi,
I am developing TLS client and server for embedded systems. Considering the operational efficiency, it is sufficient to have data authentication. Is it possible to setup a TLS communication with data authentication and without encryption?
Consider a PLC network,
1. Within physical secure zone.
2. Requires faster data transfer.
3. Data are not confidential, but must be cryptographically authenticated.
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
Hello.
I am facing the issue of certificate verification error during handshake.The problem is described by me in the appropriate section of the forum.
https://forums.mbed.com/t/mbedtls-failing-with-the-certificate-is-not-corre…
Please help me figure it out - there is no one else to turn to.
Sincerely,
Shabrov Dmitry
Good morning,
My team and me are starting a bigger project concerning object control on the rail. The security specifications shall use TLS version 1.3. I could read on some forums that you are actually working on it. Could I please get some information about the release date of it? If not provided soon we will be forced to switch to another library.
Thanks a lot for your help.
Best Regards,
Lukas Frei
Dipl. MSc Universität Bern und BFH in Biomedical Engineering
Embedded Software Engineer
CSA Engineering AG
Hans Huber-Strasse 38
CH-4500 Solothurn
Direkt +41 32 626 35 81
Telefon +41 32 626 35 55
Fax +41 32 626 35 50
mailto:lukas.frei@csa.ch
https://www.csa.ch
________________________________
Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the use of the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the/an intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete this message. Any unauthorized use of the information contained in this message is prohibited.
Good afternoon.
I am a microcontroller product designer. I ported MBED TLS to STM 32L471 microcontroller. While I do not understand how can I use the certificate. My customer gave me a certificate in the form of a center2m.com.cer file. The file contains the 3 fields:
-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
MIIGVzCCBT+gAwIBAgIMEnU/
...
-----END CERTIFICATE-----
-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
MIIET
...
-----END CERTIFICATE-----
-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
MIDDX
...
-----END CERTIFICATE-----
tell me please, how to port my certificate to certs.c file. The question is which fields to insert where? Please help. No one can answer this question except you.
Sincerely,
development engineer,
Shabrov Dmitrii
Hi All,
This is a gentle reminder that the next MBed TLS Tech forum is next Monday
@10am UK time.
Reminders:
- This is the "Asia timezone friendly" session, but the session
recording and supporting content are archived here
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/mbed-tls-technical-forum/>.
- Dial-in details can be found in the online calendar
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>. If you click on this
event in the calendar, it also provides the option to add it to your
personal calendar if you wish
If anyone has topics you would like to see added to the agenda, please
share and Dave and the team will work to get these onto the agenda.
Best regards,
Don
Hello.
I'm sorry for the sudden email.
I have a question about mbedtls.
Currently, HTTPS communication is performed by mbedtls with a
microcomputer called esp32-wroom-32d.
The following error occurs when validating the root certificate.
---------------------------------------------
mbedtls: ssl_tls.c: 5808 x509_verify_cert () returned -12288 (-0x3000)
---------------------------------------------
I can't find out the details even if I check the error code.
Changing the certificate will eliminate the error.
It has been confirmed that the certificate is legitimate and can be used.
[SecurityCommunicationRootCA1.pem] ---- Success
[SecurityCommunicationRootCA2.pem] ---- Failure
I would like to have any information.
Sorry for the unfamiliar English.
I look forward to working with you.
Komaki
This event has been changed.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Every 4 weeks from 3am to 3:50am on Monday 17 times Mountain Standard
Time - Phoenix
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
* santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MmU4dm1iNzJ0dmV1…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
This event has been changed.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
When: Every 4 weeks from 9:30am to 10:30am on Monday 17 times Mountain
Standard Time - Phoenix
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NWdhMWpuZ2ZpdWNp…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi everyone,
The PSA Crypto Driver Interface describes entry points for collecting
entropy from drivers:
|psa_status_t acme_get_entropy(uint32_t flags, size_t
*estimate_bits, uint8_t *output, size_t output_size);|
Currently, MbedTLS does not have any kind of support for those PSA
driver entry points. I'm currently looking at trying to add initial
support for those in the code. The idea is to write a very simple
solution to get the ball rolling and that can be extended and improved
later on. Is there interest for a patch to add this?
There are different ways to integrate it into the current MbedTLS code.
Do you already have plans or ideas on how it should be done? After
multiple attempts locally, I've came up with an approach that can work
well. Like for other PSA Crypto drivers, the entropy entry points would
be listed in the generated "psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.c" file. Those
entry points can then be used by a sub-function of
mbedtls_entropy_gather(). What do you think of that approach?
Best regards,
François.
Hi Max,
Unfortunately, it would not be possible for us to re-license the project to GPLv2 - this would require agreement with all copyright holders of code contributed to Mbed TLS 2.17, which isn't feasible.
For this reason I'm afraid we cannot offer an exception for individual projects.
Regards
Dave Rodgman
On 13/01/2022, 10:28, "Maximilian Fillinger via mbed-tls" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
Hello!
OpenVPN can be compiled with OpenSSL or mbedtls. However, OpenVPN is licensed under GPLv2 only. If I understand correctly, that means it is not legal to distribute binaries of OpenVPN that are linked with mbedtls 2.17 or later.
At Fox Crypto, we produce a hardened version of OpenVPN, called OpenVPN-NL, for use by the Dutch government, which uses mbedtls. (The latest release is rather old and still uses 2.16.)
Is there anyone I could ask about making an exception for linking OpenVPN with mbedtls?
Regards,
Max Fillinger
--
mbed-tls mailing list -- mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
You have been invited to the following event.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Every 4 weeks from 3am to 3:50am on Monday 17 times Mountain Standard
Time - Phoenix
Joining info: Join with Google Meet
https://meet.google.com/fwh-srqw-rgf?hs=224
Join by phone
(US) +1 304-397-0314 (PIN: 358348986)
More phone numbers: https://tel.meet/fwh-srqw-rgf?pin=6539665554630&hs=0
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MmU4dm1iNzJ0dmV1…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
You have been invited to the following event.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
When: Every 4 weeks from 9:30am to 10:30am on Monday 17 times Mountain
Standard Time - Phoenix
Joining info: Join with Google Meet
https://meet.google.com/ofy-jxph-boy?hs=224
Join by phone
(US) +1 704-705-7047 (PIN: 141276187)
More phone numbers: https://tel.meet/ofy-jxph-boy?pin=3695767709143&hs=0
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NWdhMWpuZ2ZpdWNp…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi All,
FYI, per Shebu, I'm adding both mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org to the MBed TLS Tech Forum invites.
Please look for this in your inbox and accept it if you would like the
series added to your calendar.
- Note that this is a monthly meeting but you will see two invites, one
that is for Asia timezones and one for Europe/US. Just delete the series
that isn't timezone friendly for you.
- FYI, recall that this and other tech forums can be found in the meeting
calendar on the TF website <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you see a meeting in that calendar, click on the entry and an option
comes up saying "copy to my calendar." It will import that single instance
into your personal calendar from there if you wish. I wasn't able to test
this feature with outlook, but it worked fine for google calendar.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello!
OpenVPN can be compiled with OpenSSL or mbedtls. However, OpenVPN is licensed under GPLv2 only. If I understand correctly, that means it is not legal to distribute binaries of OpenVPN that are linked with mbedtls 2.17 or later.
At Fox Crypto, we produce a hardened version of OpenVPN, called OpenVPN-NL, for use by the Dutch government, which uses mbedtls. (The latest release is rather old and still uses 2.16.)
Is there anyone I could ask about making an exception for linking OpenVPN with mbedtls?
Regards,
Max Fillinger
Hello,
I want to test/analyze the performance increase of using tinycrypt for ECC operations instead of the standard MbedTLS ECC functions. Could you please help me with a few answers regarding this?
I am aware that tinycrypt is already integrated in the baremetal branch. Do you happen to know what is the performance increase of using this tinycrypt uECC implementation instead of the standard one on arm cortex m4 microcontrollers?
I would like to port the tinycrypt uECC changes from baremetal branch to a Mbed TLS 2.25.0 version used in Matter repo (from where Mbed TLS repo is refered), more exactly this commit: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/tree/1c54b5410fd48d6bcada97e30cac417c5c7…
What do you think is the best approach? I thought of forking Mbed TLS, creating a separate branch with that commit and adding there the tinycrypt changes from baremetal branch. However, I'm not sure how to proceed next since the Matter repo refers the MbedTLS repo. Is this approach ok?
Thank you!
Hi,
I have completed my job on these topics so I would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list, can you help me?
Thank you!
Michele
[cid:image001.png@01D7FCCB.D711FD40]
Hillrom is now a part of Baxter
Michele Innocenti
Sr Principal Engineer, SW Eng
Gambro Dasco S.p.A.
Via Modenese 66 / 41036 Medolla, Modena, Italy
T. +39 0535.50578
michele_innocenti(a)baxter.com<mailto:michele_innocenti@baxter.com>
Dear all,
mbedtls 3.x is incompatible with mbedtls 2.x so the transition of all
the packages using mbedtls will take a long time. However, from my
understanding, it is not possible to install both versions side by
side as a lot of headers are common to both versions and installed in
include/mbedtls.
This fact is raising concern on buildroot side, see:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20211228153345.4087026…
Can you confirm that a side-by-side installation of both mbedtls versions
is not possible and/or can you share some inputs on this topic?
Best Regards,
Fabrice
Hi,
We are pleased to announce the release of Mbed TLS 2.16.12, 2.28.0 and 3.1.0.
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and new features, including initial support for TLS 1.3 in Mbed TLS 3.1.0.
Full details are available in the release notes (https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v3.1.0, https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.28.0, https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.16.12).
Mbed TLS 2.16.12 will be the last release in the 2.16 LTS; it will no longer be supported.
Mbed TLS 2.28 is the new long-term support release, and will be supported with bug-fixes and security fixes until end of 2024.
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
Dave Rodgman
Dear MBedTLS-Team,
we are currently evaluating MBedTLS for use in our Product. We develop
an implant for blood pressure patients, and our implant and its charger
need to communicate securely. We already have an AES encrypted
communication running, but so far we just store the password in every
device, and we would like to switch to RSA to exchange an AES key. It
would also be important for us to be able to validate an x509
certificate on the implant. However, due to energy constraints, our
internal flash memory on the implant is extremely small, and we would
like to not parse the certificate on the implant, but rather send only
the key and the signature directly, and then "validate by hand" on the
implant. If I understand the procedure correctly, that would only
involve taking a hash of the pubkey, decrypting the signature with a
stored CA-public key, and compare them, correct? Would that be possible?
Besides normal support during our implementation phase, we would be
interested in being informed whenever a vulnerability is found in
MBedTLS and a fast update. Do you offer such a service? If so, what will
it cost?
Kind Rergards,
Felix Knorr
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen neuroloop GmbH
i.A. Felix Knorr
Senior Software Developer
--------------------------------------
neuroloop GmbH
Engesserstr. 4, 79108 Freiburg, Germany
Amtsgericht Freiburg HRB 713935
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Lauk, Dr. Dennis Plachta
The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of the company of the sender of this e-mail. Unauthorized use, disclosure, or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments.
Hi,
I am trying to encrypt data on my rabbitmq communication.
On the rabbitmq server end I am using the openssl and on the client end I cant use openssl but I can use mbedtls.
I am using mbedtls-2.26.0 version in my rabbimq-c client .
The certificate is generated via https://github.com/michaelklishin/tls-gen
The certificate is valid and has no issue because the communication works fine when I use the ssl_client2 and ssl_server2 applications from the mbedtls-2.26.0\programs.
The communication works fine when I use the rabbitmq openssl client and openssl server.
But when I try to use the rabbitmq openssl server and ssl_client2 from mbedtls-2.26.0\programs the connection is reset.
I think it’s a config issue but I am not able to figure out the solution or the rootcause.
I am not sure if I can use mbedtls client with openssl server.
Could you please help me in this.
Below is the log from wireshark. Attached is the log from sslclient2 program.
After the certificate is verified the broker resets the connection
TCP 60271 → 5671 [SYN] Seq=0 Win=65535 Len=0 MSS=65475 WS=256 SACK_PERM=1
TCP 5671 → 60271 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=65535 Len=0 MSS=65475 WS=256 SACK_PERM=1
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=1 Win=2618880 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Client Hello
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=305 Win=2618880 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Server Hello, Certificate, Server Key Exchange, Certificate Request, Server Hello Done
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=305 Ack=1976 Win=2616832 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Certificate
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=945 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Client Key Exchange
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1088 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Certificate Verify
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1173 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Change Cipher Spec
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1179 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Encrypted Handshake Message
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1216 Win=2617856 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Change Cipher Spec, Encrypted Handshake Message
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1216 Ack=2019 Win=2616832 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Application Data
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=2019 Ack=1245 Win=2617856 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Application Data
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1245 Ack=2048 Win=2616832 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Encrypted Alert
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1245 Ack=2071 Win=2616832 Len=0
TCP 5671 → 60271 [RST, ACK] Seq=2071 Ack=1245 Win=0 Len=0
Thanks,
Shailaja
Hi,
On Monday at 10am UK time, we will hold the Mbed TLS Tech Forum. This is an open forum conference call for anyone to participate; please reply here if there are any agenda topics you would like to raise.
Zoom details are in the TF calendar: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/mbed-tls-technical-forum/ or see below
Dave
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
Hi guys,
I have a mbetls based server client application (DTLS) written in Apple Swift language, wrapping the mbedtls C api, running just fine for many years now on iOS, Android, and Linux. We have been compiling the code with Swift 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 in both release and debug mode.
Recently I just recompiled my code with Swift 5.5 in release mode, and my handshakes started failing on the Linux server with cryptic mbedtls_pk_sign() returned -17280 (-0x4380). When I take the same code and recompile in debug mode (-Onone) it works as expected. The same code compiled with Swift+C for iOS and macOS still works in both debug and release mode on both client/server.
If I understand the compilation process correctly, the Swift Package Manager that we use to wrap mbedtls simply uses CMakeLists.txt to compile mbedtls and pick up the right flags.
I am attaching excerpt from the log where the server part of the handshake fails (in release mode) and succeeds (in debug mode).
I am certain this is probably caused by my code and how I wrap C mbedtls sources in Swift, but I can not yet rule out a bug in Swift/C compiler part for Linux which from time to time does have bugs related to code optimization.
Could any good soul who understands the parts of the code below point me in the direction where to look and why would the mbedtls_pk_sign fail this way? What parts of the SSL context does it use? I will deep dive into the code to see whether this can be caused by memory corruption or anything else.
It’s on LTS mbedtls-2.16.11.
Could I run some tests to perhaps verify that mbedtls is compiled and working correctly?
thanks for any help,
Martin
— failing handshake —
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3296 => write server key exchange
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3074 ECDHE curve: secp521r1
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(X)' (521 bits) is:
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 01 d0 5f 4a fa 12 f8 46 75 fb 3e 38 db ba 88 ff
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 73 72 79 78 21 dd 9f ac ac 02 db e7 7e 91 6e 5c
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 06 ed 77 19 42 f1 11 6a f5 75 04 20 d8 51 50 a5
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 8f 5a 3d 8c b3 c0 15 df cc d7 5b e5 eb 04 2e b6
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 2f e7
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(Y)' (518 bits) is:
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 26 c1 52 f0 b6 20 4c aa 53 7c aa 27 12 5f 72 7f
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 11 ea a9 34 9a f5 ef 63 28 76 d8 52 4e 31 a3 13
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 52 a5 c9 52 5f 6b 41 b6 7e 47 0e 2a 68 c5 e5 80
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 14 27 ad aa 96 5b 89 41 55 5b d5 52 61 66 8c 06
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 4b
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3163 pick hash algorithm 8 for signing
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 dumping 'parameters hash' (64 bytes)
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0000: 55 c8 d2 5c 83 d8 6b e3 9f 9c b2 f4 e7 f7 4d 26 U..\..k.......M&
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0010: b4 ce c9 df c2 ae 7a 60 cb e8 02 13 d5 6d d8 ec ......z`.....m..
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0020: 48 72 77 9f e2 69 4e f5 b4 1d db 9a 75 2a 5e c7 Hrw..iN.....u*^.
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0030: e1 1b 66 fc a6 ff 37 c6 6d 42 9b b3 cf 63 bb 0e ..f...7.mB...c..
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3274 mbedtls_pk_sign() returned -17280 (-0x4380)
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_tls.c:8219 <= handshake
— successful handshake —
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3296 => write server key exchange
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3074 ECDHE curve: secp521r1
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(X)' (519 bits) is:
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 52 5f 4e 78 48 bd be 6a e4 98 21 30 ce 1c ba 08
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 b7 ae 88 d3 ff c9 c4 a5 8c 13 1e 73 5b 1f 08 60
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 7c 51 a7 ec 91 54 d7 52 f3 55 6a 34 92 cf 92 e8
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 c8 39 33 5e d3 46 3d 89 e7 6d 8f 41 d9 e0 67 e6
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 7c
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(Y)' (520 bits) is:
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 87 48 29 20 93 8e f8 9a a9 54 70 26 58 79 9d 67
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 8c ec 0f 06 ae 73 13 40 72 58 fe c1 6e 14 b4 48
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 55 a1 27 74 9d 63 36 aa db 80 29 f8 ab 9c 64 ba
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 f9 0a 19 af 9a 65 6f 02 96 c6 53 4d 49 4f b4 f5
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 46
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3163 pick hash algorithm 8 for signing
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 dumping 'parameters hash' (64 bytes)
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0000: e1 65 f4 f0 a6 a3 67 7d 32 55 ed 2a 13 08 71 8a .e....g}2U.*..q.
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0010: 7e 13 f6 30 85 ed c3 c9 10 e8 b2 43 75 bc 6c 24 ~..0.......Cu.l$
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0020: 8f fb d8 90 cb 53 7f 13 53 13 1b f4 eb bd 38 5c .....S..S.....8\
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0030: ec 46 c2 0c a9 93 5b 60 5e 5d 81 f2 b3 b0 b5 a8 .F....[`^]......
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 dumping 'my signature' (256 bytes)
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0000: 7a a7 0f 17 79 33 36 b7 0c 17 84 5b cc ca 1c 0c z...y36....[....
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0010: cb f5 56 80 ea 5d 7f cf ab 86 d5 f9 91 36 0e 68 ..V..].......6.h
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0020: 76 c6 c0 4b 77 bf 28 e7 b8 c0 a7 de ea d8 a0 30 v..Kw.(........0
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0030: 3a b3 4e 24 ea e0 c8 0b e7 ad ba 4d 35 30 c0 39 :.N$.......M50.9
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0040: a8 ff f0 6d 8f 28 db fc 5e c3 fb 21 fe 76 dd 07 ...m.(..^..!.v..
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0050: 1b 2c 58 fe 7b 0a f5 72 49 d9 d1 9a 10 af 29 21 .,X.{..rI.....)!
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0060: 7a d9 01 a4 99 01 de 6e ae fd 76 ce b9 64 84 49 z......n..v..d.I
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0070: 96 97 2d 3a 15 ed 5b de d5 99 9d 1b eb 4c 1a aa ..-:..[......L..
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0080: a8 e6 36 29 bd 67 b0 50 91 6e b8 cb 0a 42 4a 79 ..6).g.P.n...BJy
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0090: 4a 65 ae 95 d0 bc 5a e1 e7 75 2a f9 ba 51 1c 2c Je....Z..u*..Q.,
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00a0: ff 67 e3 df eb a0 d7 6c d2 cf 71 d2 ea 24 7c 16 .g.....l..q..$|.
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00b0: f8 5b 72 83 56 a9 48 e1 b6 cd d0 bd dd 20 23 d5 .[r.V.H...... #.
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00c0: 80 c4 bd 6e 42 1c 61 b2 e4 41 01 ce c8 85 26 21 ...nB.a..A....&!
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00d0: b4 0a 5e fe 50 0d 6f 45 a8 fe 15 18 87 e3 ae b3 ..^.P.oE........
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00e0: ac 46 c5 c6 bb bc 70 1b 32 b7 15 c5 3d fb 09 1e .F....p.2...=...
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00f0: 8f 69 f7 e7 a8 86 4d 0b 87 ea 4b fe 08 7e 00 0b .i....M...K..~..
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:3289 => write handshake message
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:2917 => ssl_flight_append
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:2953 <= ssl_flight_append
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:3425 <= write handshake message
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3380 <= write server key exchange
Hi,
Is it possible to run the benchmark of all cyphers natively on a ESP32
board? I have already run them on laptop but my goal is to run them on
esp32, using for example tool like espifd.
Hello
You are receiving this email because you are subscribed to one or more
mailing lists on lists.trustedfirmware.org.
The purpose of this email is to let you know that the software on the
server is being upgraded between Wednesday 29th December and Friday 31st
December. During that time, the server will be unavailable and any email
sent to a list on the server will be queued for later delivery.
After the upgrade has been completed, you will receive a follow-up email
from me to confirm that the upgrade has been completed and to provide you
with instructions on how to set up your account on the new server. With the
new software, you have one account regardless of how many mailing lists you
are subscribed to.
Regards
Philip Colmer
Director, Information Services
Linaro
Hello,
Is it possible to output a mbedtls_x509_crt as PEM or DER? I’ve been combing the API docs but don’t see how I can do this export. I see controls for exporting a newly-built cert, but not one that comes from, e.g., mbedtls_ssl_get_peer_cert().
Thank you!
Cheers,
-Felipe Gasper
https://gist.github.com/FGasper/43758d13e987518009d18ec8951ffcbb
^^ With 3.0.0 this prints:
seeded entropy
mbedtls connected
trust loaded ok
SNI set ok
handshake tried
handshake: X509 - Certificate verification failed, e.g. CRL, CA or signature check failed
… but if I switch to the development branch, it works.
Same trust chain, same code … but the production code fails while the dev one works …
Am I just “holding it wrong”?
Thank you in advance!
-FG
Hi All,
I am new here.
With a colleague, I am working on a product which previously used
PolarSSL but was later changed to MbedTLS which, in the ST ARM 32F417
implementation, is believed to be less buggy.
It is working ok as far as we have got, but we are finding that as
well as needing some 100k more FLASH, it needs nearly 50k of RAM,
which on the 32F417 (128k RAM) would normally be OK but due to other
required functionality it leaves us just 10k.
The architecture we are using for MbedTLS is a 48k (48k was found to
be the smallest that works) static buffer within which TLS runs its
own heap. I am aware that in the most generic case one has to have
enough for one 16k buffer (plus a bit) for HTTPS, but what concerns me
is that there appears to be no way to determine the worst case memory
usage, across various usage scenarios.
It would also be great to reduce this 48k to say 30k.
Some of the protocols we know we don't need (e.g. PPP) but within any
of them there is the question of which cipher suite needs supporting.
What is the minimum cipher suite required to be able to use MbedTLS as
an HTTPS client for use with typical current cloud-based file storage
or data logging APIs such as Dropbox, Google Drive, Loggly etc?
And what is the recommended minimum cipher suite required to implement
an HTTPS server that would be able to negotiate a session with most
current web-browsers?
The goal is to ideally reduce both RAM and code size requirements for
use in an embedded device that needs to work both as a general purpose
server and client, without requiring support for multiple concurrent
sessions.
The other thing is that even the ST port of MbedTLS doesn't appear to
make use of ST CPU hardware features such as AES256, DES, etc, which
the 32F417 has in hardware. This speeds things up hugely but much more
importantly in our case, saves a lot of RAM. For example AES256 can
use about 10k if done in software.
Thank you very much in advance for any input on what can be done.
Peter
Hello,
I am Marco Portoni and I am working on a thesis research for the University
of Study of Milan. It is focused on cryptographic libraries in the IoT
world, and my question is: is it possible to run the benchmark on a ESP32?
I have already runned the benchmark on 2 of my laptops to test and
collected the results, but my ultimate goal is to make the benchmark run
on the ESP. Is it possible to do it? Thanks for every help!
Marco
Hello,
I’m trying to build shared from git on macOS and having no luck. I’m doing:
> mkdir build; cd build
> cmake DUSE_SHARED_MBEDTLS_LIBRARY=On ..
…
> make
…
> ls -la library
total 2944
drwxr-xr-x 10 felipe staff 320 Dec 1 08:49 .
drwxr-xr-x 15 felipe staff 480 Dec 1 08:49 ..
drwxr-xr-x 8 felipe staff 256 Dec 1 08:49 CMakeFiles
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 92755 Dec 1 08:49 Makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 2942 Dec 1 08:49 cmake_install.cmake
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 34055 Dec 1 08:49 error.c
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 916112 Dec 1 08:49 libmbedcrypto.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 315856 Dec 1 08:49 libmbedtls.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 104072 Dec 1 08:49 libmbedx509.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 26265 Dec 1 08:49 version_features.c
Am I just missing something? It seems like I’m following what the README says to do; I also did `export SHARED=1` just in case, but that made no difference.
Thank you in advance!
-FG
Hi Radhika,
We do not plan to extend support for Mbed TLS 2.16 beyond the three year support period.
We do plan to release a 2.x LTS (probably 2.28) alongside the final 2.16 release, so that we always have an LTS available.
Regards
Dave Rodgman
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Radhika Jandhyala via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: Radhika Jandhyala <radhikaj(a)microsoft.com>
Date: Monday, 22 November 2021 at 10:50
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] End of Life of LTS branch 2.16
Hi,
I am a maintainer for https://github.com/openenclave/openenclave. We include mbedtls 2.16 as a submodule in our project.
Reading the article below, it states that 2.16 support will last at least till Dec 2021. Will you continue to support 2.16 in 2022?
https://tls.mbed.org/tech-updates/blog/announcing-lts-branch-mbedtls-2.16
We are specifically interested in CVE fixes being backported to 2.16 and the timeframe where that will continue. Is there an updated timeline for this?
We do plan to upgrade to 3.0 in early 2022, but we anticipate that will take some effort due to breaking changes.
Thank you very much!
Radhika
Hi,
Mbed TLS 2.16 LTS is approaching the end of its support period – it was originally announced that it would be maintained for at least 3 years up until the end of 2021 – and currently there is no other LTS branch.
To ensure that there is no period of time without a supported LTS branch, we plan to release 2.28 LTS in the near future (which will have the usual 3 year support period). We will continue supporting 2.16 LTS until this is available. The expectation is that as 2.28 will be API-compatible with 2.16, users of 2.16 LTS will be able to upgrade to 2.28 very easily.
Progress towards 2.28 LTS can be followed here: https://github.com/orgs/ARMmbed/projects/18#column-15836286
Dave Rodgman
Hi,
I am a maintainer for https://github.com/openenclave/openenclave. We include mbedtls 2.16 as a submodule in our project.
Reading the article below, it states that 2.16 support will last at least till Dec 2021. Will you continue to support 2.16 in 2022?
https://tls.mbed.org/tech-updates/blog/announcing-lts-branch-mbedtls-2.16
We are specifically interested in CVE fixes being backported to 2.16 and the timeframe where that will continue. Is there an updated timeline for this?
We do plan to upgrade to 3.0 in early 2022, but we anticipate that will take some effort due to breaking changes.
Thank you very much!
Radhika
Hi,
We'd like to announce a change we intend to make: starting with Mbed TLS 3.1, it will no longer be possible to build with TLS, X.509, or PK without support for PSA Crypto.
Details: currently, use of PSA Crypto APIs from the TLS, X.509 and PK layers is controlled by the option MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO. When this option is disabled (which is the default), it's possible to build without MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C. Starting with 3.1, we intend to start making TLS, X.509 and PK use PSA Crypto unconditionally, so MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C will be automatically enabled in the build as soon as TLS, X.509 or PK is enabled.
Impact: for users who already build with PSA Crypto enabled (the default), no impact. For users who currently disable MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C in their configuration, starting with 3.1 there will be no functional changes, but the size of the built library will increase due to the additional features enabled. The increase depends on the configuration, application, platform, and toolchain, but the order of magnitude currently ranges from about 9 KB for a minimal TLS configuration with LTO (link-time optimisation) to about 30 KB for a full configuration without link-time garbage collection (though size-constrained devices are very unlikely to use such a configuration); we aim to reduce this overhead in the future.
Rationale: maintaining two versions of every cryptographic operation in upper layers (one PSA, one non-PSA) imposes a significant burden on new developments. By removing that burden, we hope to progress faster on things that are more important in the long run, including better integration of PSA Crypto in TLS and X.509, and future code size optimisation of PSA Crypto. We realise the impact on users who were excluding PSA Crypto is significant. We're going to release Mbed TLS 2.28 in the coming months, which is not affected by this change and will receive bug fixes and security fixes for at least 3 years; we hope it provides an acceptable fall-back solution to affected users.
In the long run, PSA Crypto will become the only Crypto API we offer; we want to make its footprint as small as possible considering its feature set and we hope this change will enable us to make faster progress towards that goal.
Best regards,
Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard for the Mbed TLS team.
Hi,
While working on updating mbedtls to v3.0, I saw that the internal fields in MBEDTLS have been made private. ( ref- here<https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/3.0-migration-guid…>). It says there and I quote
"As a last resort, you can access the field foo of a structure bar by writing bar.MBEDTLS_PRIVATE(foo). Note that you do so at your own risk, since such code is likely to break in a future minor version of Mbed TLS.”
I just wanted to know if there is any alternative solution to this, rather than using `MBEDTLS_PRIVATE` everywhere. I know the next release of mbedtls probably plans to fix this with appropriate solution. But we wanted to push out our feature branch As early as possible.
I saw in the PR<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/37753> in zephyr RTOS about updating to mbedtls-3.0. They have just added this line<https://github.com/ceolin/zephyr/blob/5bf3128a9703561e578651218f5bcdafb96f8…>
#if !defined(MBEDTLS_ALLOW_PRIVATE_ACCESS) #define MBEDTLS_ALLOW_PRIVATE_ACCESS
# endif
Is this an alternative solution to using `MBEDTLS_PRIVATE` for accessing a private field. If yes, can somebody please point me to respective document as this would greatly reduce our code-changes.
I understand there is some discussion going on in mbedtls about this change, and appropriate getter-setter functions shall be provided. But we wanted to push out out feature branch for early testing.
Thanks and Regards,
Aditya
Hi,
On Monday 8th we will have the next Mbed TLS Tech Forum. Please reply to the list if you have any agenda topics to raise.
As a starter for the agenda, we will likely discuss: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/pull/5067 Proposal for driver dispatch code gen
Dave Rodgman
Zoom details below. The call will be recorded and made available on the TF website : https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
I need to use mbedtls (bundled with Nordic SDK, and unsure of version) to
do some cloud-based functionality (AWS cloud, using OpenAM with a CA chain
containing 4 certs). According to something I read, I need to use a pkcs7
container? If so, it seems that mbedtls does not support pkcs7? I did
hand-copy some code from a PR, but as I was looking through the pkcs7.c, it
seems that it still only supports the CA Root. Is this true?
Is there anyone that can give me a hand in solving what I am attempting to
do?
Thank you
/Loren Rogers
Dear Sir,/Madam
We need to convert the files - root.cer,client1.cer
and client1-key.pem to jks using the tool keystore explorer. For that, the
password for the files are needed.Please provide passwords.We need to
establish connection between java client and mbedtls c server.Kindly
provide help.
Regards
Lekshmi G
Dear Madam/Sir,
We are working on a project which requires IEC 62351 standards.
For that we had developed a TLS server in C language and we had the
requirement of developing a TLS client in Java language. We had used
the *mbedTLS
library for server* and *OpenMUC libraries for client*. But we are getting
exception while certificate exchange phase and all. We had attached the
listed exceptions and errors. Kindly provide necessary support for the
same. Also please confirm whether we can develop above specified
architecture, ie TLS based server in C language and client in Java. If
available please share some sample programs also. Please reply ASAP.
We have debugged the code and the following are the messages we have got in
mbedtls java server and OPENMUC java tls client . During certificate
exchange from client to server (MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE case in
server), the function returns a nonzero value and the alert shows in
server is 49 (ie, MBEDTLS_SSL_ALERT_MSG_ACCESS_DENIED). *Please check Fig
1 and Fig 2* for the messages displayed during connection
establishment.Kindly help us to solve the issues.
[image: image.png]
Fig 1- case:MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE fails
[image: image.png]
Fig 2-OPENMUC java client error when connecting to mbedtlsserver
ReplyForward
<https://drive.google.com/u/0/settings/storage?hl=en&utm_medium=web&utm_sour…>
<https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/>
<https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/>
<https://www.google.com/gmail/about/policy/>
Hi,
I would like to announce the Mbed TLS Tech Forum, a regular engineering call to discuss topics of interest to the Mbed TLS community.
The call is currently planned to take place every two weeks, alternating between US-friendly and China-friendly times (16:30 and 10:00 UK time), starting on the 25th October at 16:30 BST.
Please reply to the list if you have any agenda topics to raise. As a starting point, we will cover:
Format – check if times & cadence are suitable
TLS 1.3 – high-level update on progress & direction
PSA Cryptoprocessor Driver Interface – code generation for driver dispatch as per https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/pull/5067
Zoom details below. The call will be recorded and made available on the TF website: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/
Dave Rodgman
Mbed TLS tech lead
--
Dave Rodgman is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://armltd.zoom.us/j/93259847316?pwd=N0d4Z0o5RXRLKzZFaE1sd044bm14dz09&f…
Meeting ID: 932 5984 7316
Passcode: 991642 One tap mobile
+442034815240,,93259847316#,,,,*991642# United Kingdom
Dial by your location
+44 203 481 5240 United Kingdom
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
+1 646 518 9805 US (New York)
+91 116 480 2722 India
+91 224 879 8012 India
+91 406 480 2722 India
+91 806 480 2722 India
+852 5803 3730 Hong Kong SAR
+46 8 4468 2488 Sweden
+972 3 978 6688 Israel
+353 1 536 9320 Ireland
+36 1 408 8456 Hungary
+33 1 7037 2246 France
+358 3 4109 2129 Finland
+45 32 70 12 06 Denmark
+1 438 809 7799 Canada
+65 3158 7288 Singapore
+27 87 550 3946 South Africa
+32 1579 5132 Belgium
+48 22 307 3488 Poland
+386 1600 3102 Slovenia
+60 3 3099 2229 Malaysia
+886 (2) 7741 7473 Taiwan
Meeting ID: 932 5984 7316
Passcode: 991642 Find your local number: https://armltd.zoom.us/u/adTMafG7oQ
Join by SIP
93259847316(a)zoomcrc.com
Join by H.323
162.255.37.11 (US West)
162.255.36.11 (US East)
115.114.131.7 (India Mumbai)
115.114.115.7 (India Hyderabad)
213.19.144.110 (Amsterdam Netherlands)
213.244.140.110 (Germany)
103.122.166.55 (Australia Sydney)
103.122.167.55 (Australia Melbourne)
209.9.211.110 (Hong Kong SAR)
149.137.40.110 (Singapore)
64.211.144.160 (Brazil)
69.174.57.160 (Canada Toronto)
65.39.152.160 (Canada Vancouver)
207.226.132.110 (Japan Tokyo)
149.137.24.110 (Japan Osaka)
Meeting ID: 932 5984 7316
Passcode: 991642
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list
Mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls-announce
I'm hoping to make the switch from libressl to MbedTLS. I'm working
on a Linux from scratch style project. Curl works fine with MbedTLS
and most of the utilities I work with use libcurl. I'm also using
libtomcrypt for some of its hash and cryptographic functionality. The
only place I'm having a problem making the switch at present is when I
follow the LFS logic to make certificates (make-ca). There's a
openssl/libressl command in the script that looks like the following:
openssl x509 -hash -noout -in "$1"
Is there a way to replace this functionality with a command or
procedure or function from another program so that libressl or openssl
isn't needed to perform this step?
Thanks.
Hello,
I'm using mbedTLS on baremetal lwip+stm32f4 system as a Server. TLS working
successfully with the TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 but when I
receive the Client Hello message than my receive proccess function in
ethernetif_input: err = netif->input(p, netif); takes 300ms time. This
function normaly takes 1ms. I need to reduce this time. How Can I do that ?
This is my config file: https://paste.ofcode.org/Bdt4FapskKY7M5ggm3uViJ
Best Regards.
--
Embeded System Engineer
Dear Madam/Sir
We need to establish connection with security between
MMS client application in java(OPENMUC java client) and MMS server
(tls_server_example
in mbedtls).The java client application uses keystore.jks and
truststore.jks (*jks format* ) instead of certificate in *cer *format.Is it
possible to establish connection between OPENMUC java mms client and
libiec61850 1.5 with mbedtls-2.16.6* ?* . We have added the *root.cer
details *(certificate in the sample mbedtls server program ) to
* truststore.jks* in client (openmuc java) and *client1.cer details*
(client1 certificate in the sample mbedtls server program ) *to
keystore.jks* .When trying to establish connection server hello messages
are completed ,but showing the following error:
*MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_NO_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE.*
* Please help...*
*Regards*
*Lekshmi G*
Hi Roman,
My understanding is that you would like to add features to the Crypto
service API, but the features which you would like to add are not
cryptographic in nature.
Have you considered creating your own service for those features, instead of
modifying the Crypto service? Or is there anything makes this not a viable
option?
If you are thinking about adding hardware acceleration for some Crypto
features, that's indeed covered in Shebu's link.
Greetings,
Fabian Schmidt
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Shebu
Varghese Kuriakose via TF-M
Sent: Dienstag, 12. Oktober 2021 11:46
To: David Hu <David.Hu(a)arm.com>; Roman.Mazurak(a)infineon.com;
tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto
Service.
Caution: EXT Email
Hi Roman,
I also might not have understood the question completely.
As you mention crypto HAL API, here is the specification which defines a
standardized mechanism for PSA Crypto implementations to interface with
Secure elements and crypto accelerators -
https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/proposed/psa-driver
-interface.md
<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
m%2FARMmbed%2Fmbedtls%2Fblob%2Fdevelopment%2Fdocs%2Fproposed%2Fpsa-driver-in
terface.md&data=04%7C01%7Cfabian.schmidt%40nxp.com%7C17489158b6384ef5caa308d
98d654ead%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637696288543072051%7C
Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLC
JXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=uKX4sUH37jNx1%2BvACuN8tBQl05OaXPPnMT9FqMwbhdU%3D&r
eserved=0>
Also adding mbed-tls mailing list as the thread is crypto related..
Regards,
Shebu
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> > On Behalf Of David Hu via
TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:18 AM
To: Roman.Mazurak(a)infineon.com <mailto:Roman.Mazurak@infineon.com> ;
tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com <mailto:nd@arm.com> >
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi Roman,
Are you asking about adding platform specific HAL API to implement PSA
Crypto API function?
Please correct me if I misunderstand your question.
Best regards,
Hu Ziji
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> > On Behalf Of Roman Mazurak
via TF-M
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 9:45 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi all,
We would like to add a number of platform specific functions to Crypto
Service API. Is it ok if such functions will not be related to cryptographic
service, but such approach allows us to optimize platform design? Is there
any initiative to create a Crypto Service HAL API to extend Crypto with
custom functions?
Best regards,
Roman.
Hi Roman,
I also might not have understood the question completely.
As you mention crypto HAL API, here is the specification which defines a standardized mechanism for PSA Crypto implementations to interface with Secure elements and crypto accelerators - https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/proposed/psa-drive…
Also adding mbed-tls mailing list as the thread is crypto related..
Regards,
Shebu
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of David Hu via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:18 AM
To: Roman.Mazurak(a)infineon.com; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi Roman,
Are you asking about adding platform specific HAL API to implement PSA Crypto API function?
Please correct me if I misunderstand your question.
Best regards,
Hu Ziji
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Roman Mazurak via TF-M
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 9:45 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi all,
We would like to add a number of platform specific functions to Crypto Service API. Is it ok if such functions will not be related to cryptographic service, but such approach allows us to optimize platform design? Is there any initiative to create a Crypto Service HAL API to extend Crypto with custom functions?
Best regards,
Roman.
Hello,
I am using this example for the source of the my main purpose :
https://github.com/straight-coding/LPC407x-NoOS-LWIP-MBEDTLS-HTTPD-KEIL/blo…
This example using https but I'm trying to use this example on Modbus
Server.
This is init function for the server tcp connections:
BOOL
xMBTCPPortInit( USHORT usTCPPort )
{
struct altcp_pcb *pxPCBListenNew, *pxPCBListenOld;
BOOL bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
USHORT usPort;
extern struct altcp_tls_config* getTlsConfig(void);
tls_config = getTlsConfig();
mbedtls_ssl_conf_dbg(tls_config, my_debug, NULL);
mbedtls_debug_set_threshold(5);
if( usTCPPort == 0 )
{
usPort = MB_TCP_DEFAULT_PORT;
}
else
{
usPort = ( USHORT ) usTCPPort;
}
if( ( pxPCBListenNew = pxPCBListenOld = altcp_tls_new(
tls_config,IPADDR_TYPE_ANY) ) == NULL )
{
/* Can't create TCP socket. */
bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
}
else
if( altcp_bind( pxPCBListenNew, IP_ANY_TYPE, ( u16_t ) usPort ) !=
ERR_OK )
{
/* Bind failed - Maybe illegal port value or in use. */
( void )altcp_close( pxPCBListenOld );
bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
}
else if( ( pxPCBListenNew = altcp_listen( pxPCBListenNew ) ) == NULL )
{
( void )altcp_close( pxPCBListenOld );
bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
}
else
{
// altcp_tls_new(pxPCBListenNew, IP_GET_TYPE(ip_addr))*/;
/* Register callback function for new clients. */
altcp_accept( pxPCBListenNew, prvxMBTCPPortAccept );
/* Everything okay. Set global variable. */
pxPCBListen = pxPCBListenNew;
#ifdef MB_TCP_DEBUG
vMBPortLog( MB_LOG_DEBUG, "MBTCP-ACCEPT", "Protocol stack
ready.\r\n" );
#endif
SerialPrint("MBTCTP-ACCEPT");
}
bOkay = (BOOL)TRUE;
return bOkay;
}
struct altcp_tls_config* getTlsConfig(void)
{
struct altcp_tls_config* conf;
size_t privkey_len = strlen(privkey) + 1;
size_t privkey_pass_len = strlen(privkey_pass) + 1;
size_t cert_len = strlen(cert) + 1;
conf = altcp_tls_create_config_server_privkey_cert((u8_t*)privkey,
privkey_len, (u8_t*)privkey_pass, privkey_pass_len, (u8_t*)cert, cert_len);
return conf;
}
And I am using basic python tls client example to show successful mbedtls
handshake.
This is my client.py codes:
import time
from socket import create_connection
from ssl import SSLContext, PROTOCOL_TLS_CLIENT
import ssl
hostname='example.org'
ip = '192.168.1.2'
port = 502
context = SSLContext(PROTOCOL_TLS_CLIENT)
context.options |= ssl.OP_NO_SSLv3
context.options |= ssl.OP_NO_TLSv1
context.options |= ssl.OP_NO_TLSv1_1
context.load_verify_locations('cert.pem')
with create_connection((ip, port)) as client:
with context.wrap_socket(client, server_hostname=hostname) as tls:
print(f'Using {tls.version()}\n')
tls.sendall(b'Hello world')
data = tls.recv(1024)
print(f'Server says: {data}')
When I try to start communication I get below outputs on wireshark:
[image: image.png]
When the server send hello message I've this error on the line:
[image: image.png]
When I checked the low_level_output functions I get sending data bytes 150
byte but Ipv4 length shows us 576 byte, opt.h file set as default but if I
changed TCP_MSS as a 250 byte so I can send 136 byte and Ipv4 packet
lenght shows me 136. But does not make sense. I couldnt do successful
handshaking.
My mbedtls debug outputs in this link
https://paste.ofcode.org/PP3zFmrLcKqPdRMT3LzETz How cna I solve this
problem ? What is the reason for the lenght problem ?
Best Regards.
--
Embeded System Engineer
Hello,
I am very sorry about last email by mistakes. I have some questions about multiplication on ecp curves.
I add an ecp curve parameter in ecp_curve.c form SM2 algorithm standard, and the parameter is as follow:
Then I followed the loading method of secp256r1 to load, but I don’t know how to perform fast calculations, so I commented NIST_MODP( p256 ).
#if defined(MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1_ENABLED)
caseMBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1:
NIST_MODP( p256 );
return( LOAD_GROUP( secp256r1 ) );
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SM256_ENABLED)
caseMBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SM256:
//NIST_MODP( p256 );
return( LOAD_GROUP_A( sm256 ) );
#endif
Then I call the functional interface mbedtls_ecp_mul to perform the multiplication operation, but the heap memory keeps increasing .
voidtest()
{
intret;
mbedtls_mpiUd;
mbedtls_ecp_groupgrp;
mbedtls_ecp_pointT_Q;
mbedtls_mpi_init(&Ud);
mbedtls_ecp_group_init( &grp );
mbedtls_ecp_point_init( &T_Q );
ret=mbedtls_mpi_read_binary(&Ud, arrUd, sizeof(arr_U_d));
// ret = mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&grp,MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1);
ret=mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&grp,MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SM256);
ret=mbedtls_ecp_mul(&grp, &T_Q, &Ud, &(grp.G), NULL, NULL) ;
printf("%x\n", -ret);
mbedtls_mpi_free(&Ud);
mbedtls_ecp_group_free( &grp );
mbedtls_ecp_point_free( &T_Q );
}
intmain()
{
for(inti=0; i<10; i++)
test();
return0;
}
The heap memory is mesaured by massif( valgring tools),
Can someone tell me what this is because of and how to fix this problem ?
Best Regards.
Shudong Zhang
The |mbedtls| client project I'm working on, is to also support the
cipher suites: |TLS-ECDHE-ECDSA-WITH-AES-256-CCM| &
|TLS-ECDHE-ECDSA-WITH-AES-128-CCM|. I have specified them like:
|const int ciphersuites[] = {
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256,
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA384,
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CCM,
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CCM, 0 };
mbedtls_ssl_conf_ciphersuites(&ctxt->conf,ciphersuites); |
and while I can see the GCM ciphers in the |Client Hello|, I cannot see
the |CCM| ciphers.
In |mbedtls/include/mbedtls/config.h|, the following are enabled:
|#define MBEDTLS_CCM_ALT #define MBEDTLS_CCM_C #define
MBEDTLS_ECDH_GEN_PUBLIC_ALT #define MBEDTLS_ECDH_COMPUTE_SHARED_ALT
#define MBEDTLS_ECDSA_SIGN_ALT |
What is still missing?
While CCM is not listed under The following ciphers may be included
<https://tls.mbed.org/module-level-design-cipher>, the ciphers i would
like to add definitely show up under Supported SSL / TLS ciphersuites
<https://tls.mbed.org/supported-ssl-ciphersuites>,
Can someone help out?
Hello,
*RAM USAGE:*
We are using mbedTLS 2.16 for TLS communication and found that it is
consuming more RAM compared to other Cybersecurity library (Mocana ) which
we were using earlier. I want to reduce the RAM usage, if there are any
settings which i can apply to reduce the RAM usage
Presently MbedTLS is using almost 38KB of RAM per TLS connection, I have
small memory in my device (STM32F437), I want to reduce this RAM
consumption to 30KB per TLS connection.
*SLOWNESS:*
we have found that after 4 TLS connections on STM32F437 controller,
communication becomes very slow, we measured the CPU utilization at this
point of time, and it's only 40% ustilized, we are not getting any clue
why it becomes so slow. When we compare with Mocana cyber security library
we were able to run 6 TLS connections with good speed.
Please help us with the above 2 topics.
--
Thanks and Regards,
Sunil Jain
Hi mbedTLS team,
Our teams are in the process of reviewing available TLS library options. Is
there any information that we can find with respect to the mbedTLS stance
on TLS 1.3 support? I.E is there a timeline available supporting TLS 1.3?
Alternatively is there documentation available that outlines the expected
deltas between TLS 1.2 and 1.3 that can help compare the value gained by
using TLS 1.3 instead of 1.2?
Regards,
Alex Sukhov
Geotab
Embedded System Developer, Team Lead
Toll-free
Visit
+1 (877) 431-8221
www.geotab.com
Twitter <https://twitter.com/geotab> | Facebook
<https://www.facebook.com/Geotab> | YouTube
<https://www.youtube.com/user/MyGeotab> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/geotab/>
When we are using the version *mbedtls-2.16.6* with *libiec61850-1.5*, the
TLS connection is established successfully. But when we use the *2.7.19*,
the connection fails(we renamed *mbedtls 2.7.19* as *mbedtls 2.16* and put
in the folder third_party\mbedtls ).
We had occurred following error during the execution of client- server
example programs tls_server_example and tls_client_example using 2.7.19
version.
During handshaking process till CASE "
MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_CHANGE_CIPHER_SPEC " it worked as expected.
But In CASE "MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_FINISHED" the return value should be zero.
But we got in function mbedtls_ssl_safer_memcmp
mac_peer==41155316
mac_expect==41155356
diff=255 (this value has to be 0 for connection establishment)
But we are getting 255 constantly in all runnings.
Kindly help us to resolve the issue. If this issue is due to the non
supporting of mbedtls version ?.Thanks in advance.
Please let us know the *supporting versions of mbedtls *for
*libiec61850-1.5 *.