Micron Confidential
Hi,
I find that mbed-tls already support LMS, could you please Point to some reference and starting from which version mbedTLS lib version supports LMS?
Best Regards,
Raunak
Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
Micron Confidential
Micron Confidential
Dear MbedTLS,
Can you please help to provide some references for LMS stateful signatures schemes support in MbedTLS,
May be something like documentation and github repo link?
Unfortunately I am not able to find it online?
Thanks,
Raunak
Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
Micron Confidential
________________________________
From: Shebu Varghese Kuriakose <Shebu.VargheseKuriakose(a)arm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 8:48 PM
To: Raunak Gupta <raunakgupta(a)micron.com>; enquiries(a)trustedfirmware.org <enquiries(a)trustedfirmware.org>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: [EXT] RE: Inquiry About PQC Cryptos in embedTLS Library
Micron Confidential
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and were expecting this message.
Hi Raunak,
Mbed TLS today supports LMS stateful hash-based signature scheme. While supporting other PQC algorithms is in the Mbed TLS project roadmap, the team isn’t actively working on it. The focus for the team now is preparing for Mbed TLS 4.0.
Feel free to ask any further technical questions in the Mbed TLS public mailing list - mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org> (https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman3/lists/mbed-tls.lists.trustedfirm…)
Regards,
Shebu
Micron Confidential
From: 'Raunak Gupta' via TFenquiries <enquiries(a)trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 2:34 AM
To: enquiries(a)trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Inquiry About PQC Cryptos in embedTLS Library
Micron Confidential
Dear Trusted Firmware Team,
I hope this message finds you well. My name is Raunak, and I am a Security Engineer at Micron Technology.
I would like to inquire whether the embedTLS library has been updated to include Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) algorithms such as LMS, HSS, and XMSS.
Additionally, is the embedTLS team actively working on integrating these PQC algorithms?
Thank you for your assistance.
Best regards,
Raunak
Micron Confidential
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to enquiries+unsubscribe(a)trustedfirmware.org<mailto:enquiries+unsubscribe@trustedfirmware.org>.
Dear Mbed TLS users,
We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.6.1 and 2.28.9. These releases provide bugfixes, security fixes and minor improvements.
The 3.6.1 release includes fixes for issues caused by enabling TLS 1.3 for TLS connections in the default configuration.
Full details are available in the release notes:
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.9https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.6.1
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
Many thanks,
David Horstmann
Mbed TLS developer
Hi all,
From the announcement and also the long term plans (https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/project/long-term-plans/) it is apparent that bignum/ecp operations on the public API will go away and usage will be restricted to internal only.
I do understand and welcome the shift towards PSA API and to abandon the ALT interface for higher level legacy API crypto functions. However, I'm not so positive about removal of the bignum and ecp API. There are projects using those functions even in their PSA porting layer (Matter comes to mind: https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/blob/master/src/crypto/CHIP…) or projects using the bignum layer as abstraction (Zephyr hostap/wpa_supplicant: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/hostap/tree/main/src/crypto, crypto_mbedtls*.c).
There might be a case to support those functions to have (hardware-accelerated) low level building blocks for algorithms Mbed TLS doesn't yet or never will support. As other SSL libraries such as OpenSSL also expose similar API (BN_ and EC_POINT_ ), the removal in Mbed TLS will certainly leave a gap.
What's the view here from the project team?
Cheers,
Gernot
Hi,
We are in the process of qualifying a suitable encryption library for our pre-hospital patient monitor and the telemedicine system. I am writing to request your guidance regarding the mbed-tls use for commercial purposes. I look forward to your response.
Regards,
Praveen Kumar
R&D Project Manager
Emergency Care Professional (EC-Pro)
Philips
Tel +44 (0) 1256 362427 Email praveen.m.kumar(a)philips.com<mailto:praveen.m.kumar@philips.com>
Remote Diagnostic Technologies Limited. Registered office: Ascent 1, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Aerospace Boulevard, Farnborough GU14 6XW, UK. Registered in England No. 3321782.
[Logo Description automatically generated]<http://www.philips.com/>
Connect with Philips
[cid:image002.gif@01DAE7F8.0802FC50]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/philips/>[cid:image003.gif@01DAE7F8.0802FC50]<https://twitter.com/PhilipsHealth>[cid:image004.gif@01DAE7F8.0802FC50]<https://www.youtube.com/PhilipsHealthcare/videos>
________________________________
The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Hello,
Following consultations with the community and internal discussions
among the Mbed TLS maintenance team, we can now present the major
changes that will happen in the next major version of Mbed TLS. Our plan
remains to release in the second quarter of 2025.
The next major version will focus on two things:
1. The cryptography library will be a separate product called
TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0. The X.509 and TLS library will be called Mbed TLS
4.0, and will rely on TF-PSA-Crypto for all cryptographic functionality.
2. This release completes the migration of cryptography APIs from
classic mbedtls APIs to PSA APIs.
Please find more information below about what this means in practice.
What follows are just headlines, not an exhaustive list of changes. We
expect many small changes that do not affect major functionality.
Please note that the changes presented here are our current plan. We may
revise it based on new inputs, new insights or unexpected hurdles. You
can follow the advancement of the design, planning and development of
the next release on the 4.0+1.0 planning board at
https://github.com/orgs/Mbed-TLS/projects/15/views/1 .
Removal of legacy APIs
The following low-level application interfaces will no longer be present
in the API of TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 and Mbed TLS 4.0:
* Hashes: hkdf.h, md5.h, ripemd160.h, sha1.h, sha3.h, sha256.h, sha512.h;
* Random generation: ctr_drbg.h, hmac_drbg.h, entropy.h;
* Ciphers and modes: aes.h, aria.h, camellia.h, chacha20.h,
chachapoly.h, cipher.h, cmac.h, gcm.h, poly1305.h;
* Private key encryption mechanisms: pkcs5.h, pkcs12.h.
* Asymmetric cryptography: bignum.h, dhm.h, ecdh.h, ecdsa.h,
ecjpake.h, ecp.h, rsa.h.
The cryptographic mechanisms remain present, but they will only be
accessible via the PSA API (psa_xxx functions introduced gradually
starting with Mbed TLS 2.17).
If you maintain code that uses these interfaces, you can already start
migrating it today, since almost all PSA interfaces are available in the
mbedtls-3.6 long-time support branch (and many even in 2.28 LTS). Please
consult the PSA transition guide
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/mbedtls-3.6/docs/psa-transition.md
for guidance.
Some non-PSA crypto interfaces will still be present in TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0:
* pk.h will remain with some changes, mainly to provide an interface
to key parsing and formatting which does not have a PSA equivalent yet.
* md.h will remain as a thin layer over PSA hash functions (not HMAC)
to ease the transition.
* nist_kw.h will remain because it does not have a PSA equivalent yet.
Removal of legacy integration interfaces
TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 and Mbed TLS 4.0 will no longer support
MBEDTLS_xxx_ALT replacement of functions and modules. Use PSA
transparent drivers instead.
TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 and Mbed TLS 4.0 will no longer support
MBEDTLS_PK_RSA_ALT and MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_SE_C. Use PSA opaque drivers
instead.
TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 and Mbed TLS 4.0 will no longer have the
mbedtls/entropy.h interface to configure entropy sources. This will be
replaced by PSA random drivers.
In addition, we are planning to rework the platform abstraction layer
(MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_xxx configuration options). More details will be
available in the coming months.
Removal of legacy mechanisms
The following cryptographic mechanisms are planned to be removed in
TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 and Mbed TLS 4.0:
* DES (including 3DES).
* PKCS#1v1.5 encryption/decryption (RSAES-PKCS1-v1_5). (OAEP, PSS, and
PKCS#1v1.5 signature are staying.)
* Finite-field Diffie-Hellman with custom groups. (RFC 7919 groups
remain supported.)
* Elliptic curves of size 225 bits or less.
The following cipher suites are planned to be removed from (D)TLS 1.2 in
Mbed TLS 4.0:
* TLS_RSA_* (including TLS_RSA_PSK_*), i.e. cipher suites using RSA
decryption. (RSA signatures, i.e. TLS_ECDHE_RSA_*, are staying.)
* TLS_ECDH_*, i.e. cipher suites using static ECDH. (Ephemeral ECDH,
i.e. TLS_ECDHE_*, is staying.)
* TLS_DHE_*, i.e. cipher suites using finite-field Diffie-Hellman.
(Ephemeral ECDH, i.e. TLS_ECDHE_*, is staying.)
* TLS_*CBC*, i.e. all cipher suites using CBC.
Non-functional changes
Due to the separation into two separate products (TF-PSA-Crypto and Mbed
TLS), there will be major changes to the directory structure and to the
build system. We plan to use CMake as the primary build system.
Since TF-PSA-Crypto is a new product, identifiers that are not PSA
interfaces (such as optimisation options and platform interfaces) will
be renamed with a new prefix.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hi,
ECB is unsecure, see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_cipher_mode_of_operation#Electronic_cod…
and shouldn't be used in production.
So, I have switched to one of CBC/CMAC/CTR modes, but in
`mbedtls_cipher_cmac_starts`
I see that it only accepts ECB variants, and also doesn't seem to be
using the `type`.
From https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/8617 I see that ECB
for AES was intentional,
even for the CMAC API.
Is this expected?
1. Is using ECB for CMAC API correct?
2.Shouldn't we remove the ECB altogether?
Appreciate any clarifications.
Cheers,
Chaitanya.
Dear Trusted Firmware,
I’m Jay, an embedded security firmware developer at Hyosung TNS<https://global.hyosunginnovue.com/?lang_switch>.
We are a company that manufactures ATMs. For cryptographic communication between ATM PC software and ATM devices, we are looking for a cryptographic library to apply to ATM devices(e.g. cash dispenser). If there is an appropriate library that meets the requirements below, I would appreciate it if you could provide us an estimate. If custom development is required, I would also like to know the expected development period.
[Development environment]
- CPU : TI AM1806(ARM9)
- Compiler : ARM DS-5(armcc)
- RTOS : ThreadX
- C language
- No dynamic allocation
- VFP(Vectored Floating Point) not supported
[Security Features]
- RSA(2048bits) : Certificate and signature verification, Data encryption and decryption
- ECC(256bits) : Generating a symmetric key using ECDH and ECDSA
- 3DES, AES, AEAD, SHA256, HMAC256, etc : Algorithms related to data encryption and decryption
- Random : Prevent replay attacks
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Best Regards,
Jay
[cid:image001.png@01DAE289.1B3D4C90]
Jaewhan Shin
Performance Manager | CISSP | Firmware Development Team
Suseo Bldg., 281, Gwangpyeong-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06349 Korea
t. 82-2-6181-2480, m. 82-10-8158-3015
e. jaewhan.shin(a)hyosung.com<mailto:jaewhan.shin@hyosung.com>
hyosunginnovue.com<https://hyosunginnovue.com/>
[cid:image002.png@01DAE289.1B3D4C90]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/hyosung-tns/> [cid:image003.png@01DAE289.1B3D4C90] <https://www.youtube.com/@hyosungtns3918>
HYOSUNG TNS, Inc. Email Disclaimer. This communication, including attachments, is intended only for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential, or privileged information. Any use, review, duplication, disclosure, dissemination, or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you were not the intended recipient, and you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication, and destroy any copies.
Hello,
Mbed TLS 3.6.0 was the first release to enable TLS 1.3 support by
default. Unfortunately, this breaks many applications that open a TLS
connection with default settings, which are now negotiating TLS 1.3
instead of TLS 1.2, but hit a difference in how Mbed TLS 3.6.0
implements the two versions of the protocol.
The most common symptom is: you are using the default configuration (or
something close), and your application fails in the handshake with an
internal error whenever it negotiates TLS 1.3. To resolve this, call
psa_crypto_init() before starting a TLS handshake.
For a list of other known issues, please see
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/9223
If you are encountering a problem due to the enablement of TLS 1.3 that
is not listed on that page, please let us know by opening an issue on
GitHub.
If no workaround or patch is available for your problem yet, you can
disable TLS 1.3 by calling mbedtls_ssl_conf_max_tls_version(ssl_config,
MBEDTLS_SSL_VERSION_TLS1_2) before mbedtls_ssl_setup().
We are planning to fix all the issues listed on that page before the
3.6.1 patch release. We do not yet have a date for the 3.6.1 release.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hello!
I am trying to add TLS 1.3 support to OpenVPN when using Mbed TLS as the TLS library. My current roadblock is that OpenVPN needs the TLS-Exporter functionality (RFC 8446, Section 7.5).
For TLS 1.2, we get the master secret through mbedtls_ssl_set_export_keys_cb() and then implement the exporter using mbedtls_ssl_tls_prf(). For TLS 1.3, an approach like this doesn't work because the callback isn't called with the exporter master secret.
Am I missing anything, or does this feature not yet exist? Are there any plans to add it? If not, I'd be interested in trying to make a patch.
Best regards,
Max
https://www.bestwritercontent.com
A man was going to the house of some rich person. As he went along the road, he saw a box of good apples at the side of the road. He said, "I do not want to eat those apples; for the rich man will give me much food; he will give me very nice food to eat." Then he took the apples and threw them away into the dust.
He went on and came to a river. The river had become very big; so he could not go over it. He waited for some time; then he said, "I cannot go to the rich man's house today, for I cannot get over the river."
He began to go home. He had eaten no food that day. He began to want food. He came to the apples, and he was glad to take them out of the dust and eat them.
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
ReplyReply to allForward
Compose:
Community activity: OpenCV, Sensors, AI
[image: Minimise][image: Pop-out][image: Close]
Compose:
Reminder: MBed TLS Tech Forum - Asia/Europe
[image: Minimise][image: Pop-out][image: Close]
Recipients
Hi All,
We are using the MBedTLS 3.6.0 release stack and often see the TLS
client -> server sending Encrypted Alert 21 packets followed by
closing the SSL connection (or rather reconnection starting from new
handshake messages).
As far as I understand Alert 21 is a fatal message stating Decryption
of a TLSCiphertext record is decrypted in an invalid way: either it
was not an even multiple of the block length or its padding values,
when checked, were not correct - copied from the Internet.
But then Handshake and Application Data goes thru fine for a while and
then we see our client sending Alert 21 encrypted message
Is it legitimate that the client can send Alert 21 messages to the
server and close the current connection - we are observing that the
server application is waiting for messages from the client and is
un-aware that a connection reset has occurred. So the server
application states a timeout for receiving messages from the client.
Further, how can we assert such a scenario? When and how can it occur?
Is there a way we can simulate it and send details to owners of server
firmware to fix their issue?
Regards,
Prakash
Hi All,
We are using MbedTLS on our devices and implementing PSA wrappers to use our Crypto hardware.
For validating this one we are using MbedTLS test suites.
Could you please tell me:
1. Does your test suites compliant to FIPS 140-3?
2. Do you use NIST test vectors to validate your algorithm implementations?
Thanks.
Viktor Ivanets.
On a project at my company, we're using mbedtls to encrypt and sign our
data. We began the project with mbedtls 2.2.6, and have continuously
upgraded until now, 3.6.0.
I've noticed my application has grown greatly since then, even though we
are only using the following APIs:
Encryption:(only decryption on the embedded side)
- mbedtls_aes_init
- mbedtls_aes_setkey_dec
- mbedtls_aes_crypt_cbc
Signing (only verification on the embedded side)
- mbedtls_ecp_point_read_binary
- mbedtls_sha256_init/free
- mbedtls_sha256_starts_ret
- mbedtls_sha256_update_ret
- mbedtls_sha256_finish_ret
- mbedtls_ecdsa_init/free
- mbedtls_ecp_group_load
- mbedtls_ecdsa_read_signature
The size of libembedcrypto.a has grown from under 400K to almost 800K.
I've tried reducing it with mbedtls_config,h, but it is not entirely clear
to me which #defines do what. I tried one of the sample configs which by
it;s name looked promising (crypto-config-ccm-aes-sha256.h), and it reduced
the size of the library by 90%, but left me with link errors for all of the
above functions. Going one #define at a time manually to see if it saves
or grows is slow, and so I hoped I could find some assistance here.
Thanks in advance
Hi TF-M and mbedtls community,
I am new to TF-M, I have a few questions about CryptoCell and random number generation. Thank you in advance.
1.
I figure there seems to have two CryptoCell 312 implementations within TF-M. One under lib/ext/cryptocell-312-runtime and the other under platform/ext/accelerator/cc312/cc312-rom. What are the difference between these two?
2.
For lib/ext/cryptocell-312-runtime, it does not define MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_EXTERNAL_RNG whereas /ext/accelerator/cc312/cc312-rom does. Does that mean cryptocell-312-runtime is initiating RNG cryptodriver by using mbedtls_entropy_add_source whereas cc312-rom is using mbedtls_psa_external_get_random<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/trusted-firmware-m/blob/8df9cc8baf462…>. If so, may I ask why these two cryptocells take two different approaches? I read from one of the documentation that mbedtls_psa_external_get_random is used when entropy is sufficient. So if entropy is sufficient, is it always preferred to have MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_EXTERNAL_RNG defined and implements mbedtls_psa_external_get_random? What are the differences between the two approaches.
3.
I also found cryptocell-312-runtime defines the entry point function cc3xx_init_random<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/trusted-firmware-m/blob/8df9cc8baf462…>. But since PSA random number entry point funciton is not complete, the cc3xx_init_random is not being called anywhere, right?
[https://opengraph.githubassets.com/17cdebc400b0ed807c620b586b21f3f77ff9c5d3…]<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/trusted-firmware-m/blob/8df9cc8baf462…>
trusted-firmware-m/platform/ext/accelerator/cc312/cc312-rom/psa_driver_api/src/cc3xx_psa_random.c at 8df9cc8baf46252fd188bba1d87333a8daa9a5e8 · zephyrproject-rtos/trusted-firmware-m<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/trusted-firmware-m/blob/8df9cc8baf462…>
Zephyr repository tracking https://git.trustedfirmware.org/trusted-firmware-m.git/ - zephyrproject-rtos/trusted-firmware-m
github.com
4.
I know random number generation PSA entry point function is in development, may I ask when that would be expected to complete?
Thank you very much!
Best regards,
Hao
Hello,
This is a request for feedback about the next major release of Mbed TLS
(TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 + Mbed TLS 4.0). (Mbed TLS 3.6 LTS will remain
supported with its current feature set until at least Q2 2027.) Please
reply to this thread or on the GitHub issue linked below. If you wish to
leave feedback privately, you can reply privately and your feedback will
be anonymized before sharing outside Arm.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto/issues/107
Should TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 (and thus Mbed TLS 4.0) have an interface for
*pseudo*-random generation? It will, of course, still have a
pseudorandom generator (= deterministic random bit generator = DRBG)
internally, to power psa_generate_random(), psa_generate_key(), etc. The
question is whether there will still be a public interface to create
other DRBG instances, and if so, with what interface.
If you want to be able to create instances of HMAC_DRBG and CTR_DRBG
from application code in TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0, please let us know what your
use case is. In particular, what parameters do you need (HMAC_DRBG and
CTR_DRBG have many)? Do you need reseeding, and if so under whose
control (the DRBG, or the caller)? In the absence of feedback, it is
likely that HMAC_DRBG and CTR_DRBG will not be publicly available.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hi all,
I have a custom configuration where MBEDTLS_ECDSA_C is defined but MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C and MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_CONFIG are not.
This leads to a compiler warning in e.g. psa_util.c because a zero-sized array is declared
(because PSA_VENDOR_ECC_MAX_CURVE_BITS is defined as 0).
As of C99, §6.7.5.2 Array declarators: "If the expression is a constant expression, it shall have a value greater than zero."
psa_util.c:
#if defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_UTIL_HAVE_ECDSA) // Line 368
int mbedtls_ecdsa_raw_to_der(...) // Line 433
unsigned char r[PSA_BITS_TO_BYTES(PSA_VENDOR_ECC_MAX_CURVE_BITS)]; // Line 436 --> becomes in my config: unsigned char r[0];
MBEDTLS_PSA_UTIL_HAVE_ECDSA is automatically defined in my configuration due to the following code in config_adjust_legacy_crypto.h:
#if defined(MBEDTLS_ECDSA_C) || (defined(MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C) && \
(defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_ECDSA) || defined(PSA_WANT_ALG_DETERMINISTIC_ECDSA)))
#define MBEDTLS_PSA_UTIL_HAVE_ECDSA
#endif
PSA_VENDOR_ECC_MAX_CURVE_BITS only receives a non-zero value if a PSA_WANT_<CURVE>, e.g. PSA_WANT_ECC_BRAINPOOL_P_R1_256, is defined.
PSA_WANT_<CURVE> only gets defined in crypto_config.h if MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_CONFIG is defined (which it is not in my configuration).
I have worked around it by explicitly defining e.g. PSA_WANT_ECC_BRAINPOOL_P_R1_256 in my configuration.
But I believe there is some mismatch in the defines, at least in this example case, because mbedtls_ecdsa_raw_to_der() is only used in pk_wrap.c if MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO is defined.
Impact:
* In general, zero-sized arrays have undefined behavior in C (but are allowed by some compiler extensions) and thus behave differently for different compilers
--> you might want to review PSA_VENDOR_ECC_MAX_CURVE_BITS and PSA_VENDOR_FFDH_MAX_KEY_BITS (and possibly more definitions) that fall through to 0 and are used as array sizes.
* In my particular case, I believe code is compiled that is not needed (defines in psa_util.c and pk_wrap.c do not seem to match)
Hello,
This is a request for feedback about the next major release of Mbed TLS
(Mbed TLS 4.0). (Mbed TLS 3.6 LTS will remain supported with its current
feature set until at least Q2 2027.) Please reply to this thread or on
the GitHub issue linked below. If you wish to leave feedback privately,
you can reply privately and your feedback will be anonymized before
sharing outside Arm.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/9307
Mbed TLS requires a C99 platform, with some pragmatic restrictions. One
restriction is that we do not require printf and friends to support %zu
for size_t printing. Starting with Mbed TLS 4.0, we are considering
requiring printf() and friends (or the mbedtls_printf() and friends
alternatives if overridden) to support %zu. This only affects the TLS
library, not X.509 and crypto.
Is it still necessary in 2025 to support platforms where printf() does
not support the z modifier?
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hello,
This is a request for feedback about the next major release of Mbed TLS
(TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 + Mbed TLS 4.0). (Mbed TLS 3.6 LTS will remain
supported with its current feature set until at least Q2 2027.) Please
reply to this thread or on the GitHub issue linked below. If you wish to
leave feedback privately, you can reply privately and your feedback will
be anonymized before sharing outside Arm.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto/issues/106
We are evaluating build systems for TF-PSA-Crypto, and this will
influence the Mbed TLS build as well (the Mbed TLS build scripts will
call the TF-PSA-Crypto build scripts, whatever they are). Our current
thinking is that we would like to have *CMake as the sole build system*.
(We're still investigating whether CMake can do all we need.) That would
mean that we would no longer provide GNU makefiles or Visual Studio
solutions.
As this remains a C project, for just building the library, compiling
all the .c files with an include path covering all the .h files will
keep working in common cases (but, as today, it isn't something we
support officially). The main case I can think of where this wouldn't
work is when cryptographic accelerator support requires special includes
or compiler flags.
Are there environments where the use of CMake is a problem? What is the
oldest version of CMake that you'd like us to be compatible with?
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hello,
This is a request for feedback about the next major release of Mbed TLS
(Mbed TLS 4.0). (Mbed TLS 3.6 LTS will remain supported with its current
feature set until at least Q2 2027.) Please reply to this thread or on
the GitHub issue linked below. If you wish to leave feedback privately,
you can reply privately and your feedback will be anonymized before
sharing outside Arm.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/8170
We are considering removing support for RSA and RSA-PSK key exchanges in
Mbed TLS 4. These are cipher suites that use RSA encryption, as opposed
to cipher suites using a key agreement (ECDHE) plus RSA signature. These
key exchanges are hard to implement securely (we believe we got it
right, but it's very delicate code), and they add significantly to the
complexity of the TLS code. They have been formally deprecated for a
long time and were removed in TLS 1.3. However, I'm aware that some
ecosystems are clinging to RSA key exchange.
Are RSA-encryption key exchanges still relevant for Mbed TLS? If you
want Mbed TLS 4 to keep supporting RSA-encryption cipher suites in TLS
1.2, please let us know and tell us about your use cases.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hello,
This is a request for feedback about the next major release of Mbed TLS
(TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0 + Mbed TLS 4.0). (Mbed TLS 3.6 LTS will remain
supported with its current feature set until at least Q2 2027.) Please
reply to this thread or on the GitHub issue linked below. If you wish to
leave feedback privately, you can reply privately and your feedback will
be anonymized before sharing outside Arm.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/8231
We currently have two implementations of accelerated AES on x86_64 using
AESNI (Intel AES acceleration): using assembly or using compiler
intrinsics. The assembly code works with GCC and Clang without any
compilation options, but not with MSVC. The intrinsics work with MSVC,
but not with ancient GCC/Clang and they require compiling at least
aesni.c with suitable CPU variant options (e.g. -maes -mpclmul for Clang).
We're considering removing the assembly implementation. Is there still
interest in compiling AESNI support with older compilers or with simple
build systems that don't pass machine options?
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
+ Mbed TLS mailing list as well for visibility and any comments.
Regards,
Shebu
From: Zhang, Hao via TF-M <tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 12:37 AM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] PSA Cryptoprocessor Driver Interface
Hi TF-M community,
TF-M allows Semiconductor vendors to plug in their HW accelerator using PSA cryptoprocessor driver interface. I have a couple of questions in terms of the driver interface.
1. To port customized HW accelerator to TF-M's Crypto service for TF-M v2.1.0 LTS using driver interface, for the multipart operation, https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls/blob/zephyr/docs/proposed/psa… states that "A driver that implements a multi-part operation must define all of the entry points in this family as well as a type that represents the operation context." Take aead encrypt as an example, if the underlying hardware does not support aead_abort, could it implements aead_abort by simply return PSA_ERROR_NOT_SUPPORTED?
1. The driver interface depends heavily on psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h to dispatch operations to customized HW accelerator, where the psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h file is automatically generated by scripts/data_files/driver_templates/psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h.jinja. To port customized HW accelerator to TF-M's Crypto service for TF-M v2.1.0 LTS, would the approach be creating a customized psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h.jinja file, the driver description file in JSON, and entry point functions. If so and we are considering upstreaming TF-M in the future, all these files would go inside platform/ext/accelerator/<vendor name>. Efforts need to be made so files such as psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h.jinja should point to mbedtls, right? Additionally, as .jinja is retiring (mentioned in another email exchange), how would semi vendors update psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.h in the future?
[https://opengraph.githubassets.com/c87e79773a7fb0841ea038f7cf3dfdf4170debb8…]<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls/blob/zephyr/docs/proposed/psa…>
mbedtls/docs/proposed/psa-driver-interface.md at zephyr * zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls/blob/zephyr/docs/proposed/psa…>
mbedtls module for Zephyr, this is not a mirror of the official mbedtls repository. - zephyrproject-rtos/mbedtls
github.com
Thank you very much!
Best regards