- mbed-tls - lists.trustedfirmware.org

Mbed TLS 4.0.0-beta & TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0.0-beta releases.

by Minos Galanakis

I am happy to announce the joint-release of Mbed TLS 4.0.0-beta & TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0.0-beta PSA-Crypto now lives in its own repository while TLS and X.509 remain in Mbed TLS. This beta release breaks compatibility with earlier versions of Mbed TLS. Please do not use it in production. It’s intended for the community to verify codebase integrations against the split and API changes, and for early adopters to experiment and provide feedback. For full details, please see the release pages: Mbed TLS 4.0.0-beta: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-4.0.0-beta TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0.0-beta: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto/releases/tag/tf-psa-crypto-1.0.0-…

12 months

1
0
0 0

[Mbed-tls-announce] Mbed TLS 4.0.0-beta & TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0.0-beta

by Minos Galanakis via Mbed-tls-announce

I am happy to announce the joint-release of Mbed TLS 4.0.0-beta & TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0.0-beta PSA-Crypto now lives in its own repository while TLS and X.509 remain in Mbed TLS. This beta release breaks compatibility with earlier versions of Mbed TLS. Please do not use it in production. It’s intended for the community to verify codebase integrations against the split and API changes, and for early adopters to experiment and provide feedback. For full details, please see the release pages: Mbed TLS 4.0.0-beta: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-4.0.0-beta TF-PSA-Crypto 1.0.0-beta: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto/releases/tag/tf-psa-crypto-1.0.0-… 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

12 months

1
0
0 0

[Mbed-tls-announce] Mbed TLS 3.6.4 Released

by Minos Galanakis via Mbed-tls-announce

Hi Mbed TLS users, We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.6.4. 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/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.6.4). We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately. 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

1 year

1
0
0 0

imx-secure-enclave with mbedtls 2.28.9

by kavitha bk

Hi We are using mbedtls 2.28.9 and want to offload crypto operations to HSM from NXP imx-secure-enclave. is the below approach correct or please suggest alternate approaches if any? 1.Transition all apis from traditional apis to psa in modules Use PSA crypto module https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/psa-transition.md 2. Integrate PSA module with imx-secure-enclave in our custom mbedtls 3. All modules will use custom mbedtls which will internally offload crypto operations to HSM or Do you recommend to use MBEDTLS_PK_RSA_ALT_SUPPORT? and implement the key creation/signing/export of public key operations ? Thanks, Kavitha

1 year

2
2
0 0

Mbed TLS information request

by Solis, Hector

Hi! We are working with Mbed TLS 3.6.0 library and need the following information: 1. Is there any End-Of-Life date planned for this library? 2. What is the current version? 3. How can we obtain support for the library enquiries? Does this support has a cost? 4. How is the library update? Does this update has a cost? 5. Are this library Open Source? Thanks in advance for your help! 🙂 Have a great day! Héctor J. Solís Castillo Embedded Engr I Honeywell | HTS Building Automation 990, Av. Eje 5 Norte, Mexico City CDMX hectorjose.solis(a)honeywell.com<mailto:hectorjose.solis@honeywell.com> honeywell.com<http://www.honeywell.com/> Pronouns: He/Him<https://www.mypronouns.org/what-and-why>

1 year

2
1
0 0

Question about partial certificate chains

by Roman Janota

Hello, I have the following two certificate chains: server <- intermediateCA <- rootCA and client <- intermediateCA <- rootCA. Currently there are two ways the client is authenticated by the server: both the intermediateCA and rootCA certificates are configured as CAs on the server or if only intermediateCA is configured. I am using a custom verify callback set by mbedtls_ssl_conf_verify(). I would like to achieve two separate cases: 1) Make the MbedTLS' built-in pre-verify be successful, even when only the rootCA certificate is set as the server's CA. 2) Always obtain the whole certificate chain up to the root in the verify callback. For case 1) this is how our OpenSSL TLS implementation works, it is discussed here <https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/7871>. From my understanding the server should be able to build the certificate chain by inquiring the client about its certificate's issuer, etc. For case 2), whenever both rootCA and intermediateCA are configured on the server, only the chain client <- intermediateCA is received by the callback. I would like to be able to receive the chain client <- intermediateCA <- rootCA. Are these two cases achievable with mbedTLS? For reference I am using mbedTLS 3.5.2. For my server I would like to utilize both cases 1) and 2) and for the client only the case 1). Kind regards, Roman Janota

1 year

1
0
0 0

PSA Crypto API version compliance

by Zak, Kevin

Hello, I notice in 'crypto.h' of mbedTLS 3.6.3, PSA_CRYPTO_API_VERSION_MAJOR & PSA_CRYPTO_API_VERSION_MINOR show the version implemented as v1.0. Per the github page of TF-PSA-Crypto (https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto/blob/development/README.md), the implementation is of v1.1. I verified that this mismatch between the README and crypto.h exists on the development branch of TF-PSA-Crypto as well. What is the correct version implemented, as of mbedTLS 3.6.3? Regards, Kevin

1 year, 1 month

1
0
0 0

(no subject)

by Steve Glass

Hi, I'm trying to build the mbedtls v3.6.3 for an embedded 386 device. The build is configured as `crypto_baremetal`. In the snippet below I use the make build process with a GCC 11.2 cross toolchain that's installed in `/opt/x-tools/i386-elf but the build process ends with an error: ``` (venv) dev [ /workspaces/mbedtls ]$ make CC=/opt/x-tools/i386-elf/bin/i386-elf-gcc AR=/opt/x-tools/i386-elf/bin/i386-elf-ar make[1]: Entering directory '/workspaces/mbedtls/library' CC aes.c CC aesni.c CC aesce.c ... CC src/certs.c CC src/psa_test_wrappers.c CC src/test_helpers/ssl_helpers.c make[1]: Leaving directory '/workspaces/mbedtls/tests' make[1]: Entering directory '/workspaces/mbedtls/programs' CC aes/crypt_and_hash.c /opt/x-tools/i386-elf/lib/gcc/i386-elf/11.2.0/../../../../i386-elf/bin/ld: cannot find crt0.o: No such file or directory collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make[1]: *** [Makefile:160: aes/crypt_and_hash] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/workspaces/mbedtls/programs' make: *** [Makefile:34: programs] Error 2 (venv) dev [ /workspaces/mbedtls ]$ ``` So I have two questions: This error says it fails to link find crt0.o but the output (library/libmbedcrypto.a) exists and looks ok (altho I've yet to try linking against it). Is the error message spurious or is the library it produced unusable? Do I really need a version of crt0.o to link successfully? (The same configuration builds with no errors using the host's x64 compiler toolchain - and that toolchain also doesn't have a crt0.o file). Thanks in advance!

1 year, 1 month

1
1
0 0

Any plan for a Java Binding ?

by Simon Bernard

Hi, I'm the main developer of Leshan Library. This is a Java open source implementation of LWM2M protocol hosted at Eclipse Foundation. We currently use Scandium (from Californium Project) as DTLS library. This library fits our needs until now but we have some concerns about future-proofness of it (Especially, there is no plan for DTLS 1.3) and there is no support of TLS. So we explore some other way for the future. I had consider to use OpenJdk but there is a lot of missing IoT Features. I contact OpenJdk security dev and they makes me understand politely that IoT is not the priority (at least this is my understanding) Another solution we explore would be to use an mbedtls Java binding. (as mbedtls is well supported and focus IoT) There is a not official one at : https://github.com/open-coap/kotlin-mbedtls *Questions : * 1. Is there any official java binding ? 2. If no, is there any plan for that kind of binding ? 3. If no, if there is a community initiative could it be hosted by you ? Thx, Simon

1 year, 1 month

2
2
0 0

Invitation: MBed-TLS Technical Forum - Asia @ Every 4 weeks from 10am to 10:50am on Monday (GMT) (mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org)

by Shaun Longhorn

MBed-TLS Technical Forum - Asia Every 4 weeks from 10am to 10:50am on Monday United Kingdom Time Location https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI… https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fj%2F9985393… Join Zoom Meeting https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI… Join by phone (US) +1 833-548-0282 passcode: 12278212 Joining instructions https://www.google.com/url?q=https://applications.zoom.us/addon/invitation/… Joining notes Meeting host: shaun.longhorn(a)linaro.org Join Zoom Meeting: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI… ──────────https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI.1&jst=2Joining Instructions────────── Guests mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org View all guest info https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NjI4c3NnYjFoZHRh… Reply for mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and view more details https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NjI4c3NnYjFoZHRh… 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. 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

1 year, 1 month

1
0
0 0

Invitation: MBed-TLS Technical Forum - Asia @ Every 4 weeks from 10am to 10:50am on Monday (BST) (mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org)

by Shaun Longhorn

MBed-TLS Technical Forum - Asia Every 4 weeks from 10am to 10:50am on Monday United Kingdom Time Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.Topic: MBed-TLS Technical Forum - AsiaTime: Jun 16, 2025 10:00 AM London Every 4 weeks on Mon, 39 occurrence(s)Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.Weekly: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJMqcuGuqDotGtIbACm498ytl0ZhydWKdu1b/ics… Zoom Meetinghttps://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/97758661706?pwd=baMjUvnWbY20z3ignQca7QVahhozkI.1Meeting ID: 977 5866 1706Passcode: 577208---One tap mobile+16892781000,,97758661706# US+17193594580,,97758661706# US---Dial by your location• +1 689 278 1000 US• +1 719 359 4580 US• +1 253 205 0468 US• +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)• +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)• +1 305 224 1968 US• +1 309 205 3325 US• +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)• +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)• +1 360 209 5623 US• +1 386 347 5053 US• +1 507 473 4847 US• +1 564 217 2000 US• +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)• +1 646 931 3860 US• +1 669 444 9171 US• +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)• 833 548 0282 US Toll-free• 833 928 4608 US Toll-free• 833 928 4609 US Toll-free• 833 928 4610 US Toll-free• 877 853 5247 US Toll-free• 888 788 0099 US Toll-free• 833 548 0276 US Toll-freeMeeting ID: 977 5866 1706Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/acdtApJNbc Guests mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org View all guest info https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NjI4c3NnYjFoZHRh… Reply for mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and view more details https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NjI4c3NnYjFoZHRh… 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. 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

1 year, 1 month

1
0
0 0

Invitation: MBed-TLS Technical Forum - Asia @ Every 4 weeks from 10am to 10:50am on Monday from Mon 21 Apr to Sun 18 May (BST) (mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org)

by Shaun Longhorn

MBed-TLS Technical Forum - Asia Every 4 weeks from 10am to 10:50am on Monday from Monday 21 Apr to Sunday 18 May United Kingdom Time Location https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI… https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fj%2F9985393… Join Zoom Meeting https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI… Join by phone (US) +1 833-548-0282 passcode: 12278212 Joining instructions https://www.google.com/url?q=https://applications.zoom.us/addon/invitation/… Joining notes Meeting host: shaun.longhorn(a)linaro.org Join Zoom Meeting: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI… ──────────https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99853938085?pwd=D3au597hb9J1veo1W74pIqkvY6VaDI.1&jst=2Joining Instructions────────── Guests mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org View all guest info https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NjI4c3NnYjFoZHRh… Reply for mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and view more details https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NjI4c3NnYjFoZHRh… 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. 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

1 year, 1 month

1
0
0 0

PQC code from European Project QUBIP - Security Pattern

by Alberto Battistello

Hi all, I am writing in behalf of Security Pattern, a security firm specialized in embedded systems. We are a member of the QUBIP European Funded Project (https://qubip.eu), which aims at transitioning protocols, networks, and systems to Post Quantum algorithms. As a result of the project, we have integrated a set of Post Quantum algorithms in the TLS1.3 stack of the MbedTLS code (see here https://github.com/QUBIP/pq-mqtt-client-mbedtls). We have code running on STM32 Nucleo board in two versions: the former is a full software, by leveraging the crypto primitives provided in a library developed by another partner, the latter using a Secure Element emulated by FPGA connected via I2C (also developed by another partner of QUBIP). Our main work has beed dedicated to integrating the new hybrid KEM and signatures (MLKEM768-x25519 and MLDSA44-Ed25519) into the TLS stack, in order to demonstrate communication with an MQTT broker running OpenSSL. At the current stage we are about to publish the code on github with MIT license (here https://github.com/QUBIP/pq-mqtt-client-mbedtls). Meanwhile, we think the effort we made could be of help for MBedTLS development/developers. So I would like to ask if you can address me to some contact that is responsible in MbedTLS or ARM about the PQC transition or the best way to facilitate the use/integration of our work. Best Regards, Alberto -- Security Pattern <https://www.securitypattern.com/> Alberto Battistello Senior Security Engineer M. +39 333 3239810 Via G. Boccaccio, 58 | 25080 Mazzano (BS) | Italy | P.I. 03943650980 www.securitypattern.com <https://www.securitypattern.com/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm…> | Follow Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/securitypattern/> | We value your privacy <https://www.iubenda.com/privacy-policy/40319464/legal>

1 year, 1 month

2
1
0 0

handshake fail with "Alert (Level: Fatal, Description: Protocol Version)"

by 扶柏成

Hi all, We have encountered a challenge while using mbedTLS 3.5.1 and would greatly appreciate the assistance of the experts. Thank you in advance for your support. I used mbedTLS 3.5.1 to connect to the server acc.connect.cpms.milence.com, and the TLS handshake failed with an Alert (Level: Fatal, Description: Protocol Version) error. Detailed information is described at this GitHub issue<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/10141>. * We attempted to connect with the Windows EDGE browser and found through packet capture that the handshake was successful. * We were also able to successfully handshake using TLS 1.2. * When we limited the supported group to only: MBEDTLS_SSL_IANA_TLS_GROUP_SECP256R1 and used TLS 1.3, the handshake was also successful. For more details, please refer to the discussion on GitHub: Handshake fail with "Alert (Level: Fatal, Description: Protocol Version)" ・ Issue #10141 ・ Mbed-TLS/mbedtls<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/10141>. Best Regards, Fu Baicheng

1 year, 2 months

1
0
0 0

Mbed TLS 3.6.3 and 2.28.10

by Minos Galanakis

Dear Mbed TLS users, We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.6.3 and 2.28.10. These releases provide bugfixes, security fixes and minor improvements. This release of Mbed TLS provides the fix for the TLS compatibility issue of handling fragmented handshake messages. This release includes fixes for security issues. Full details are available in the release notes: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.10 https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.6.3 We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately. Many thanks, Minos Galanakis Mbed TLS developer

1 year, 3 months

1
0
0 0

[Mbed-tls-announce] Mbed TLS 3.6.3 and 2.28.10

by Minos Galanakis via Mbed-tls-announce

Dear Mbed TLS users, We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.6.3 and 2.28.10. These releases provide bugfixes, security fixes and minor improvements. This release of Mbed TLS provides the fix for the TLS compatibility issue of handling fragmented handshake messages. This release includes fixes for security issues. Full details are available in the release notes: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.10 https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.6.3 We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately. Many thanks, Minos Galanakis 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

1 year, 3 months

1
0
0 0

[Mbed-tls-announce] Announcing Mbed TLS 3.6.3 and 2.28.10

by Gilles Peskine via Mbed-tls-announce

Dear Mbed TLS users, The next release of Mbed TLS (3.6.3 and 2.28.10) is scheduled on Monday 2025-03-24. It will include a security fix for a vulnerability with a high impact to affected applications. Due to the nature of the vulnerability, which involves an insecure default in current versions of Mbed TLS, fixing it may require a small change in application code. We will provide instructions in the release notes. Without this change, affected applications will fail at runtime with Mbed TLS 3.6.3 or 2.28.10. Applications that are currently secure will generally not require any change. We apologize for the inconvenience. Best regards, -- Gilles Peskine On behalf of the Mbed TLS security 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

1 year, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Inquiry about the ECC-160 bit size support in MbedTLS

by Ankita Hatmode

Hi Team, I am working on an embedded security project and exploring ECC support in MbedTLS 3.6.2. I would like to confirm whether the MbedTLS supports ECC-160 i.e. Elliptic Curve Cryptography with a 160 bit key size, in the latest version or any earlier versions. Looking forward to your response. Thanks and regards, Ankita Hatmode -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **Disclaimer:** This email message including any attachments is confidential, and may be privileged and proprietary to Agiliad. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy all copies of this message including any attachments. You are NOT authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 year, 3 months

3
2
0 0

Problem during test_suite generation while cross-compiling on version 3.6.2

by Francois Mace

Hello Everybody, I am trying to migrate my cross-compilation setup from version 2.28.9 to version 3.6.2. I use a Makefile based approach for compilation. Everything seems to work fine up to the point where the compilation process reaches the test_suite data generation Gen suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_generate_key.generated.data suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_low_hash.generated.data suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_not_supported.generated.data suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_op_fail.generated.data suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_storage_format.current.data suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_storage_format.v0.data At that point it seems that the python based tools attempts to execute a temp executable (generated for my cross-compilation target ?) which fails. The traceback obtained is the following: Traceback (most recent call last): File "../framework/scripts/generate_psa_tests.py", line 849, in <module> test_data_generation.main(sys.argv[1:], __doc__, PSATestGenerator) File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/test_data_generation.py", line 224, in main generator.generate_target(target) File "../framework/scripts/generate_psa_tests.py", line 845, in generate_target super().generate_target(name, self.info) File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/test_data_generation.py", line 177, in generate_target self.write_test_data_file(name, test_cases) File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/test_data_generation.py", line 164, in write_test_data_file test_case.write_data_file(filename, test_cases) File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/test_case.py", line 88, in write_data_file for tc in test_cases: File "../framework/scripts/generate_psa_tests.py", line 694, in all_test_cases if key.location_value() != 0: File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/psa_storage.py", line 186, in location_value return self.lifetime.value() >> 8 File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/psa_storage.py", line 89, in value self.update_cache() File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/psa_storage.py", line 67, in update_cache include_path=includes) #type: List[str] File "/home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/framework/scripts/mbedtls_framework/c_build_helper.py", line 158, in get_c_expression_values output = subprocess.check_output([exe_name]) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/subprocess.py", line 395, in check_output **kwargs).stdout File "/usr/lib/python3.7/subprocess.py", line 472, in run with Popen(*popenargs, **kwargs) as process: File "/usr/lib/python3.7/subprocess.py", line 775, in __init__ restore_signals, start_new_session) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/subprocess.py", line 1522, in _execute_child raise child_exception_type(errno_num, err_msg, err_filename) OSError: [Errno 8] Exec format error: '/tmp/tmp--m95sjmdw' make[2]: *** [Makefile:127: generated_psa_test_data] Error 1 make[2] : on quitte le répertoire « /home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2/tests » make[1]: *** [Makefile:35: tests] Error 2 make[1] : on quitte le répertoire « /home/dev/test/mbed-TLS_3.6.2 » make: *** [test.make:152: all] Error 2 Looking at the format of the generated tmp executable, it seems it is generated for my cross-compilation target, it therefore cannot be executed in my compilation environment. I would like to be able to generate the test and test data in order to be able to execute them on my compilation target, which is what I used to do with the previously integrated version of the library. Is there something I am missing in my compilation? am I missing a specific setup variable in my Makefile? Thanks for your feedback. Best regards, Francois

1 year, 4 months

2
1
0 0

Different performance from 2.6.2 to 3.6.2 for https file upload

by Stefano Tebaldi

Hello, I recently updated mbedTLS library version 2.6.2 to 3.6.2. I am using the library to add https to Mongoose web server on a STM32H753 with FreeRTOS + LWIP. 2.6.2 was generated in a IAR project using STMCubeMX. What I am noticing is that file transfer performance has gotten much worse. With version 2.6.2 it took a few minutes to transfer a file of around 33 MB, now with version 3.6.2 it takes around 15 min. What could this depend on? Attached is the configuration used for the two versions. The certificate for https is EC curve secp256r1. Thank you

1 year, 4 months

2
4
0 0

[Mbed-tls-announce] Mbed TLS 4.0/TF-PSA Crypto 1.0 release timeline

by Janos Follath via Mbed-tls-announce

Dear Mbed TLS and PSA Crypto users, We would like to update you on the release timeline for Mbed TLS 4.0/TF-PSACrypto1.0 release. As a reminder, the key objectives of the release are a separate TF-PSA Crypto repo., PSA Crypto becoming the de facto Crypto API and Mbed TLS using PSA Crypto APIs as the crypto API by default. While TF-PSA Crypto repository is now available, the remaining effort to be ready for the release is more than we originally planned for. Based on remaining effort estimates, we plan to make Mbed TLS 4.0-Beta and TF-PSA Crypto 1.0-Beta release around end of June. The Mbed TLS 4.0, and TF-PSA Crypto 1.0 release is expected around end of September. We don’t expect users to integrate the Beta release. Beta is aimed to pipeclean the separate Mbed TLS and TF-PSA Crypto release process and get any early feedback. The release in September is expected to be integrated by users to their projects. We wanted to provide these revised release dates so that the users can plan accordingly. In the meantime, bug fixes and security fixes will continue to be provided via. Mbed TLS 3.6.x LTS releases. Thanks, Mbed TLS/PSA Crypto Maintainers. -- 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

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Support for Quantum Safe Algorithms

by NAYNA JAIN

Hi MbedTLS team, I have been following up the MbedTLS roadmap from here - https://mbed-tls.readthedocs.io/en/latest/project/roadmap/ . It talks about Post Quantum Cryptography support in future. And in the section of Long Term Plans for MbedTLS, I see the note related to PQC as "Regarding post-quantum cryptography (PQC) in particular, we do plan to wait until there are official standards: as of 2023, apart from stateful hash-based signatures, there are too many open questions about selected algorithms (choice of parameters, data formats, hybrid combinations…). This note seems to be pretty old as it refers to 2023.. So, are there any latest update on the roadmap? Is there any plan to support latest NIST standardized algorithms (ML-DSA, ML-KEM, SLH-DSA) in this year or next year. Thanks & Regards, * Nayna

1 year, 5 months

3
2
0 0

Using mbedTLS for TLS&X509 with a separate PSA Crypto Implementation

by Zak, Kevin

Hello mbedtls mailing list, I'm working to modify mbedTLS (3.6.2) to use our PSA Crypto Implementation in a separate library. Our solution does not make use of PSA 'drivers' that mbedTLS refers to. I've modified makefiles to not build PSA Crypto files, and have enabled MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C & MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO. I've also defined MBEDTLS_PSA_ACCEL_ALG_XXX for our supported algorithms. 1. Is there a good way to determine whether a given TLS/X509 configuration would require a certain 'legacy' (maybe a better term is 'non-PSA') crypto file to be built into the mbedTLS library? * The goal is to build as few crypto source files into the mbedTLS source files as possible, maximizing usage of our separate PSA implementation 2. Example: My test application using mbedtls_x509_crt_parse() receives linking errors for mbedtls_ecp_(group/point)_xxx() and mbedtls_mpi_xxx() that are referenced in pkparse.c (which I am building into the library). * Ecp.c is currently excluded from the build (as is its define) - if I add it, I add significantly more linking errors for mbedtls_mpi APIs. I was under the impression that ECP and MPI APIs could be avoided with the correct configuration. * If ecp/mpi helper APIs are needed still for x509, this would be good to know. However, I'd like to avoid usage of MPI APIs that perform actual software calculations. See the screenshot for a list of non-PSA crypto files I am currently building to test with. I imagine I may have to add more incrementally. [cid:image001.png@01DB726D.879014D0] Any insights on this general use case or my ECP troubles with x509 would be appreciated. I plan to extend the strategy as these are the findings from an attempt to use just one x509 API. Best, Kevin Zak

1 year, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Use mbedtls_gcm_auth_decrypt get wrong tag

by Elva Huang

Dear mbed TLS team, Recently, while debugging my code, I encountered an issue when using the AES-GCM algorithm. I found that when calling the mbedtls_gcm_auth_decrypt interface in version 3.6.1, the calculated tag consistently does not match the input tag. However, when using the same interface in version 2.28.2, the tag is successfully calculated as expected. Below is the demo code we are using: tstSecKeyList g_stPreInterKey = { .u8KeyNum = 5U, .u8IsUse = 1U, .u16KeyLen = 16U, .u16IVLen = 12U, .u16AddLen = 16U, .enuSecType = SEC_AES_GCM, .au8Key = { 0x68U, 0xffU, 0xb7U, 0xffU, 0x5eU, 0xffU, 0x10U, 0xffU, 0x9eU, 0xffU, 0xb8U, 0xffU, 0x01U, 0xffU, 0xb9U, 0xffU, 0xa0U, 0xffU, 0x1cU, 0xffU, 0xdfU, 0xffU, 0x0aU, 0xffU, 0xe6U, 0xffU, 0xc8U, 0xffU, 0xc5U, 0xffU, 0x39U, 0xffU }, .au8Iv = { 0x3, 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x3 }, .au8Add = { 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0 } .u16AddLen = 0, }; static uint8_t s_au8SecMemoryBuffer[6*1024]; mbedtls_gcm_context aesGcmContext; uint8_t *pau8EncryptedPlain = inParam0; (note: inParam0=434421d30c9abf31b96d2d28d00b5cb4e6fe84033999d53d3a50674b3aedd81f) uint8_t *pau8AesTag = inParam0 + 16; (e6fe84033999d53d3a50674b3aedd81f) uint8_t u8EncryptedPlainLen = 16; uint8_t u8AesTagKeyLen = 16; mbedtls_gcm_init(&aesGcmContext); mbedtls_memory_buffer_alloc_init(s_au8SecMemoryBuffer, 6*1024); vidPreInterKeyget(g_stPreInterKey.au8Key, au8preInterKey); mbedtls_gcm_setkey(&aesGcmContext, MBEDTLS_CIPHER_ID_AES, au8preInterKey, 16*8); s32Ret = mbedtls_gcm_auth_decrypt(&aesGcmContext, u8EncryptedPlainLen, g_stPreInterKey.au8Iv, g_stPreInterKey.u16IVLen, g_stPreInterKey.au8Add, g_stPreInterKey.u16AddLen, pau8AesTag, u8AesTagKeyLen, pau8EncryptedPlain, s_au8DecryptKey); Best regards,

1 year, 5 months

1
1
0 0

Question Regarding Change Cipher Spec States in the TLS 1.3 Handshake Protocol

by 千山啼祢

Dear Developer, I was reviewing the code and noticed that in the TLS 1.3 handshake protocol state machine, the "Change Cipher Spec" state has been divided into five different states based on its occurrence timing. Could you please clarify if there are any specific considerations for this approach? Additionally, these states can appear multiple times during a single handshake, which implies multiple "Change Cipher Spec" messages. However, the TLS 1.3 standard suggests that the "Change Cipher Spec" should only appear once in a single handshake. Could you kindly explain the rationale behind this design decision? Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your response. Best regards, XiangDong Li

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Inquiry Regarding mbedTLS v2.16.2 Compatibility for Secure MQTT Connection on STM32CubeIDE

by Noushad

Hello, I am currently working on a project using STM32CubeIDE, where I am leveraging mbedTLS v2.16.2 to establish a secure MQTT connection with a Mosquitto broker on port 8883. During my implementation, I encountered a TLS handshake error with the following details: mbedtls_ssl_handshake failed. -29312 (-0x7280) I would like to confirm if mbedTLS v2.16.2, as provided in STM32CubeIDE, supports secure TLS connections (e.g., Secure MQTT) and is compatible with Mosquitto broker configurations. Additionally, I would appreciate guidance on resolving this error. Here are some specific details about my setup: 1. mbedTLS version: 2.16.2 (as integrated into STM32CubeIDE). 2. Broker: Mosquitto, configured for secure MQTT on port 8883. 3. Issue: TLS handshake fails with the error mentioned above. 4. Certificates: [CA certificates, ]. Please let me know if additional information Regards, Noushad Embedded systems engineer Inthings Technologies Private Limited www.inthings.tech<http://www.inthings.tech> [cid:image001.png@01DB65BA.1F5B9660]

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Question Regarding Change Cipher Spec States in the TLS 1.3 Handshake Protocol

by 千山啼祢

Dear Developer, I was reviewing the code and noticed that in the TLS 1.3 handshake protocol state machine, the "Change Cipher Spec" state has been divided into five different states based on its occurrence timing. Could you please clarify if there are any specific considerations for this approach? Additionally, these states can appear multiple times during a single handshake, which implies multiple "Change Cipher Spec" messages. However, the TLS 1.3 standard suggests that the "Change Cipher Spec" should only appear once in a single handshake. Could you kindly explain the rationale behind this design decision? Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your response. Best regards, XiangDong Li

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Heap and stack usage information

by Michael Thomas

Hi, I am trying to determine what would be an optimal stack and heap allocation for mbedtls. I realize this changes with algorithms, some configuration macros for the algorithms as well as concurrency. But is there any information on stack and heap usage that I can use as a starting point? And is there any information on the same for a crypto suite. Thanks Michael T Disclaimer: This message and any files or text attached to it are intended only for the recipients named above and contain information that may be confidential or privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, you must not forward, copy, use or otherwise disclose this communication or the information contained herein. In the event you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, and then delete all copies of it from your system. Thank you.

1 year, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Inquiry Regarding mbedTLS v2.16.2 Compatibility for Secure MQTT Connection on STM32CubeIDE

by Noushad

Hello, I am currently working on a project using STM32CubeIDE, where I am leveraging mbedTLS v2.16.2 to establish a secure MQTT connection with a Mosquitto broker on port 8883. During my implementation, I encountered a TLS handshake error with the following details: mbedtls_ssl_handshake failed. -29312 (-0x7280) I would like to confirm if mbedTLS v2.16.2, as provided in STM32CubeIDE, supports secure TLS connections (e.g., Secure MQTT) and is compatible with Mosquitto broker configurations. Additionally, I would appreciate guidance on resolving this error. Here are some specific details about my setup: 1. mbedTLS version: 2.16.2 (as integrated into STM32CubeIDE). 2. Broker: Mosquitto, configured for secure MQTT on port 8883. 3. Issue: TLS handshake fails with the error mentioned above. 4. Certificates: [Specify if you are using self-signed certificates, CA certificates, etc.]. Please let me know if additional information or logs would be helpful for diagnosing the issue. Thank you for your assistance. Regards, Noushad Embedded systems engineer Inthings Technologies Private Limited www.inthings.tech<http://www.inthings.tech> [cid:image001.png@01DB5D28.96B30030] Regards, Noushad Embedded systems engineer Inthings Technologies Private Limited www.inthings.tech<http://www.inthings.tech> [cid:image001.png@01DB5D28.96B30030]

1 year, 6 months

2
1
0 0

Request for Assistance with Iterative Loading and Verification of Built-in Certificates in Mbed TLS

by xiaobing wang

Dear Mbed TLS Support Team, I am currently working on a project using Mbed TLS version 3.6 on FreeRTOS, and I am encountering an issue with handling multiple CA certificates during the TLS handshake process. My device has a set of built-in certificates, and I need to try each certificate one by one to establish a successful connection to my server. However, I am facing difficulties in this process. ### System Information: - **Mbed TLS version**: 3.6 - **Operating System**: FreeRTOS - **Configuration**: Default - **Compiler and Options**: N/A (using default configuration) ### Expected Behavior: The first certificate (e.g., `cdotroot.cer`) cannot be verified by Mbed TLS, while the correct certificate should successfully establish a connection. ### Actual Behavior: Both the incorrect and correct CA certificates fail to establish a connection successfully. ### Steps to Reproduce: Here is a sample of my code: ```c static int load_and_verify_certificates(int conn_id, uint8_t *cert_buffer, size_t buffer_size) { int ret; bool connection_established = false; uint32_t cert_index = 0; while (!connection_established && cert_index < MAX_CERT_COUNT) { size_t cert_size = buffer_size; // Free and initialize the certificate context mbedtls_x509_crt_free(&cacert[conn_id]); mbedtls_x509_crt_init(&cacert[conn_id]); // Load the built-in certificate ret = try_built_in_certificate(cert_buffer, &cert_size, cert_index); if (ret == CERT_ERR_INDEX_OUT_OF_RANGE) { break; } if (ret != CERT_SUCCESS) { cert_index++; continue; } // Parse the certificate cert_buffer[cert_size] = '\0'; ret = mbedtls_x509_crt_parse(&cacert[conn_id], cert_buffer, cert_size + 1); if (ret < 0) { cert_index++; continue; } // Set the certificate chain mbedtls_ssl_conf_ca_chain(&conf[conn_id], &cacert[conn_id], NULL); // Perform the TLS handshake ret = mbedtls_ssl_handshake(&ssl[conn_id]); if (ret == 0) { uint32_t flags = mbedtls_ssl_get_verify_result(&ssl[conn_id]); if (flags == 0) { connection_established = true; // Cache the certificate cache_certificate(cert_buffer, cert_size, cert_index); break; } } else { LOGD("Failed to perform handshake with certificate index %d, error: -0x%x\n", cert_index, -ret); } // Reset the SSL session ret = mbedtls_ssl_session_reset(&ssl[conn_id]); if (ret != 0) { LOGD("Failed to reset SSL session, error: -0x%x\n", -ret); return ret; } cert_index++; } return connection_established ? 0 : -1; } ``` ### Additional Information: Here are the logs: ``` Reading certificate 'cdotroot.cer' at address 0x08100650, size: 1348 Failed to perform handshake with certificate index 0, error: -0x2700 Reading certificate 'digicertroot.cer' at address 0x08100B94, size: 1360 Failed to perform handshake with certificate index 1, error: -0x7300 ... ``` I suspect that the issue may be related to the limited RAM space available on my device. I am looking for guidance on how to properly iterate through and verify the built-in certificates within these constraints. Any suggestions or best practices for handling multiple certificates in such an environment would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your assistance. Best regards, [Tony] --- Feel free to replace `[Your Name]` with your actual name before sending the email.

1 year, 6 months

1
0
0 0

How to use a different mbedtls_config.h file?

by Alexander Slatina

Hello, I described an issue I have here: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/9867 During compilation it compiles with the wrong mbedtls_config.h even though I set up this part in my CMakeLists.txt: #MbedTLS default START # 1. MbedTLS custom config setup set(MBEDTLS_DIR ${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/mbedtls) set(MBEDTLS_CONFIG_FILE "${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/mbedtls_config.h") add_compile_definitions( MBEDTLS_CONFIG_FILE="${MBEDTLS_CONFIG_FILE}" MBEDTLS_USER_CONFIG_FILE="${MBEDTLS_CONFIG_FILE}" ) set(ENABLE_TESTING OFF CACHE BOOL "Disable mbedtls testing" FORCE) set(ENABLE_PROGRAMS OFF CACHE BOOL "Disable mbedtls programs" FORCE) set(MBEDTLS_DIR ${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/mbedtls) # Add mbedtls build add_subdirectory(${MBEDTLS_DIR}) #MbedTLS END There’s more information on the GitHub link. Thank you in advance. Alex

1 year, 6 months

1
0
0 0

TF-PSA-Crypto

by Janos Follath

Dear Mbed TLS users, Mbed TLS has contained the reference implementation of the PSA Crypto API since the early days of the standard. This implementation was experimental at first, but over years of development it reached maturity, and the experimental status was removed three years ago (in version 3.6.1.). Shortly after that, in 2022, the TF-PSA-Crypto<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto> repository was created just for the PSA Crypto API implementation to make it more accessible for users only interested in that. This repository was only a mirror of the main one and the development of the PSA Crypto API implementation remained integral part of Mbed TLS. In the background, work has been started to make this repository the place where the development of the PSA Crypto API reference implementation happens. This work has finally been completed and from now on TF-PSA-Crypto<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto> is ready to receive contributions, bug reports and enhancement requests. TF-PSA-Crypto<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto> will now be the development repository for the PSA Crypto reference implementation. Mbed TLS will continue to rely on TF-PSA-Crypto<https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/TF-PSA-Crypto> and will be using it as a submodule. Many thanks, Janos Follath Mbed TLS developer

1 year, 6 months

1
0
0 0

advice on mbedtls_ssl_context change between v2.16.1 and 3.6.2

by Daniel Webb

Hi, Can you give me a little advice on how v3 works? I've updated our mbed library from 2.16.1 to 3.6.2 which was mostly a very smooth experience, thanks. The one question in my mind relates to making p_bio private in mbedtls_ssl_context *I used to free it before calling mbedtls_ssl_free - is it ok to skip this now? ie:* //mbedtls_net_free((mbedtls_net_context *) m_ssl.p_bio); mbedtls_ssl_free(&m_ssl); *I also used to poll it before calling mbedtls_ssl_close_notify - is ok to skip this now? ie:* //if(mbedtls_net_poll((mbedtls_net_context *) m_ssl.p_bio, MBEDTLS_NET_POLL_WRITE, 0) < 0) // return; int ret; while((ret = mbedtls_ssl_close_notify(&m_ssl)) < 0) { if(ret != MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_WANT_READ && ret != MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_WANT_WRITE) return; } It all seems to run just fine like this, but I could really do with some confidence boosting validation of my cavalier commenting. Thank you Daniel

1 year, 6 months

1
1
0 0

Integrating Mbed TLS with LWIP

by Bas Prins

Dear Mbed TLS team, I am trying to integrate Mbed TLS in our platform: - nxp imx rt 1024 CPU (arm based) - FreeRTOS (10.6) - Lwip (2.2) - Mbed TLS (3.6.2) I am using the LWIP port to Mbed TLS and managed to create an client configuration by supplying a google certificate which I created as follows: openssl s_client -showcerts -connect www.google.com:443 </dev/null 2>/dev/null | openssl x509 -outform PEM > google_root_ca.pem PS: using the true random number generator in our CPU as the entropy source for Mbed TLS. I ran into some issues which I managed to resolve by adding another option in Mbed TLS (found this on a forum which solved the problem): #define MBEDTLS_RSA_C /* required for google's root CA */ #define MBEDTLS_PKCS1_V21 /* required for RSA */ Next I connected our http client to use the TLS configuration and gave it a first spin by trying to send a HTTP GET request to google.com. The TLS handshake failed. I enabled logging in the hope this would give me a direction, but I can't see where things go wrong (until the obvious error -0x7780 (MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_FATAL_ALERT_MESSAGE)). Can somebody see what goes wrong on the client side, which results in the server deciding to fail the request? Attached the log and will paste it here in the email. ====================== [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.612 [Info ] [Http] GET from google.com:443 - / [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.630 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(1327): The SSL configuration is tls12 only. [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.676 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4606): => handshake [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.678 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.678 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.696 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4525): client state: MBEDTLS_SSL_HELLO_REQUEST [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.718 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.736 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.766 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4525): client state: MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_HELLO [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.792 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(919): => write client hello [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.820 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(486): dumping 'client hello, random bytes' (32 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.848 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(486): 0000: 7b 5a 55 53 71 4d 5d ec 7e 88 19 f8 fc b7 72 b4 {ZUSq M].~.....r. [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.878 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(486): 0010: d1 7e 13 df 21 b8 b6 3f 38 36 d4 63 19 f4 27 89 .~..! ..?86.c..'. [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.904 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(511): dumping 'session id' (0 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.930 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(369): client hello, add ciphersuite: c02b, TLS-ECDHE-ECDSA-WITH-AES -128-GCM-SHA256 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.962 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(387): adding EMPTY_RENEGOTIATION_INFO_SCSV [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.988 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(396): client hello, got 2 cipher suites [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(230): client hello, adding supported_groups extension [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(249): got supported group(0017) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(281): NamedGroup: secp256r1 ( 17 ) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(249): got supported group(0018) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(281): NamedGroup: secp384r1 ( 18 ) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(301): dumping 'Supported groups extension' (6 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(301): 0000: 00 04 00 17 00 18 ..... . [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(9593): adding signature_algorithms extension [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(9613): got signature scheme [403] ecdsa_secp256r1_sha256 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(9622): sent signature scheme [403] ecdsa_secp256r1_sha256 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(9613): got signature scheme [401] rsa_pkcs1_sha256 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(9622): sent signature scheme [401] rsa_pkcs1_sha256 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls12_client.c(105): client hello, adding supported_point_formats extension [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(688): client hello, total extension length: 26 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(690): dumping 'client hello extensions' (26 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(690): 0000: 00 1a 00 0a 00 06 00 04 00 17 00 18 00 0d 00 06 ..... ........... [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(690): 0010: 00 04 04 03 04 01 00 0b 00 02 ..... ..... [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2783): => write handshake message [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2943): => write record [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3027): output record: msgtype = 22, version = [3:3], msglen = 75 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3032): dumping 'output record sent to network' (80 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3032): 0000: 16 03 03 00 4b 01 00 00 47 03 03 7b 5a 55 53 71 ....K.. .G..{ZUSq [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3032): 0010: 4d 5d ec 7e 88 19 f8 fc b7 72 b4 d1 7e 13 df 21 M].~... ..r..~..! [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3032): 0020: b8 b6 3f 38 36 d4 63 19 f4 27 89 00 00 04 c0 2b ..?86.c ..'.....+ [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3032): 0030: 00 ff 01 00 00 1a 00 0a 00 06 00 04 00 17 00 18 ....... ......... [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3032): 0040: 00 0d 00 06 00 04 04 03 04 01 00 0b 00 02 01 00 ....... ......... [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3080): <= write record [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2904): <= write handshake message [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_client.c(1012): <= write client hello [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:35.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.008 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2367): message length: 80, out_left: 80 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.044 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2374): ssl->f_send() returned 80 (-0xffffffb0) [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.082 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2401): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.114 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4525): client state: MBEDTLS_SSL_SERVER_HELLO [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.142 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls12_client.c(1193): => parse server hello [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.170 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(4189): => read record [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.196 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2155): => fetch input [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.226 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2295): in_left: 0, nb_want: 5 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.256 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2315): in_left: 0, nb_want: 5 [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.284 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4617): <= handshake [2024-12-11 09:08:28] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.314 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.344 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.374 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.400 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:36.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:37.380 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:29] 2024-12-10 12:53:37.382 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:30] 2024-12-10 12:53:37.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:30] 2024-12-10 12:53:37.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:30] 2024-12-10 12:53:38.392 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:30] 2024-12-10 12:53:38.394 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:38.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:38.999 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.346 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4606): => handshake [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.346 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2353): => flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.348 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2362): <= flush output [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.348 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4525): client state: MBEDTLS_SSL_SERVER_HELLO [2024-12-11 09:08:31] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.350 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls12_client.c(1193): => parse server hello [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.350 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(4189): => read record [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.352 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2155): => fetch input [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.378 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2295): in_left: 0, nb_want: 5 [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.404 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2315): in_left: 0, nb_want: 5 [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.430 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2318): ssl->f_recv(_timeout)() returned 5 (-0xfffffffb) [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.460 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2340): <= fetch input [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.490 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3855): dumping 'input record header' (5 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.516 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3855): 0000: 15 03 03 00 02 ..... [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.542 [Debug] [Http] 3 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3857): input record: msgtype = 21, version = [0x303], msglen = 2 [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.570 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2155): => fetch input [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.598 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2295): in_left: 5, nb_want: 7 [2024-12-11 09:08:32] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.630 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2315): in_left: 5, nb_want: 7 [2024-12-11 09:09:51] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.656 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2318): ssl->f_recv(_timeout)() returned 2 (-0xfffffffe) [2024-12-11 09:09:51] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.688 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(2340): <= fetch input [2024-12-11 09:09:51] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.722 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3964): dumping 'input record from network' (7 bytes) [2024-12-11 09:09:52] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.756 [Debug] [Http] 4 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(3964): 0000: 15 03 03 00 02 02 28 ......( [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.782 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(5092): got an alert message, type: [2:40] [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:53:39.810 [Debug] [Http] 1 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(5099): is a fatal alert message (msg 40) [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:54:59.004 [Debug] [Http] 1 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c(4244): mbedtls_ssl_handle_message_type() returned -30592 (-0x7780) [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:54:59.036 [Debug] [Http] 1 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls12_client.c(1197): mbedtls_ssl_read_record() returned -30592 (-0x7780) [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:54:59.062 [Debug] [Http] 2 - /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c(4617): <= handshake [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:54:59.094 [Debug] [External] mbedtls_ssl_handshake failed: -30592 [2024-12-11 09:09:55] 2024-12-10 12:55:02.000 [Debug] [Http] Download failed: httpc_result 4, srv_resp 0, err -15 ====================== Many thanks in advance! Best regards, Bas

1 year, 6 months

1
0
0 0

C448 according RFC7748?

by Tom Strolch

Hello all, I want to use mbedtls-functions for "Shared Secret" according ECDH with C448. First I want to check the test vectors mentioned in RFC7748 (chapter 6.2). But it fails in function mbedtls_ecdh_compute_shared(...) with return value -0x4C80 MBEDTLS_ERR_ECP_INVALID_KEY (please see code below) But up to now I can't find the root cause. Is there a similar example available? Regards, Tom // Alice's private key static const unsigned char alice_private_key[] = { 0x77, 0x07, 0x6d, 0x0a, 0x73, 0x18, 0xa5, 0x7d, 0x3c, 0x16, 0xc1, 0x72, 0x51, 0xb2, 0x66, 0x45, 0xdf, 0x4c, 0x2f, 0x87, 0xeb, 0xc0, 0x99, 0x2a, 0xb1, 0x77, 0xfb, 0xa5, 0x1d, 0xb9, 0x2c, 0x2a }; // Bob's private key static const unsigned char bob_private_key[] = { 0x5d, 0xab, 0x08, 0x7e, 0x62, 0x4a, 0x8a, 0x4b, 0x79, 0xe1, 0x7f, 0x8b, 0x83, 0x80, 0x0e, 0xe6, 0x6f, 0x3b, 0xb1, 0x29, 0x26, 0x18, 0xb6, 0xfd, 0x1c, 0x2f, 0x8b, 0x27, 0xff, 0x88, 0xe0, 0xeb }; int main() { mbedtls_ecdh_context ecdh; unsigned char shared_secret[32]; size_t olen; int ret; mbedtls_ecdh_init(&ecdh); // Load Bob's private key ret = mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&ecdh.grp, MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_CURVE25519); if (ret != 0) { printf("Failed to load group\n"); return 1; } ret = mbedtls_mpi_read_binary(&ecdh.d, bob_private_key, sizeof(bob_private_key)); if (ret != 0) { printf("Failed to read private key\n"); return 1; } // Compute the shared secret ret = mbedtls_ecdh_compute_shared(&ecdh.grp, &ecdh.z, &ecdh.Qp, &ecdh.d, mbedtls_ctr_drbg_random, NULL); if (ret != 0) { printf("Failed to compute shared secret\n"); return 1; } ... Test vector: Alice's private key, a: 9a8f4925d1519f5775cf46b04b5800d4ee9ee8bae8bc5565d498c28d d9c9baf574a9419744897391006382a6f127ab1d9ac2d8c0a598726b Alice's public key, X448(a, 5): 9b08f7cc31b7e3e67d22d5aea121074a273bd2b83de09c63faa73d2c 22c5d9bbc836647241d953d40c5b12da88120d53177f80e532c41fa0 Bob's private key, b: 1c306a7ac2a0e2e0990b294470cba339e6453772b075811d8fad0d1d 6927c120bb5ee8972b0d3e21374c9c921b09d1b0366f10b65173992d Bob's public key, X448(b, 5): 3eb7a829b0cd20f5bcfc0b599b6feccf6da4627107bdb0d4f345b430 27d8b972fc3e34fb4232a13ca706dcb57aec3dae07bdc1c67bf33609 Their shared secret, K: 07fff4181ac6cc95ec1c16a94a0f74d12da232ce40a77552281d282b b60c0b56fd2464c335543936521c24403085d59a449a5037514a879d

1 year, 6 months

1
0
0 0

Migrate LWIP mbed TLS port to Mbed TLS 3.6.2 (or later)

by Bas Prins

Dear Mbed TLS team, I am trying to integrate Mbed TLS in our platform: - nxp imx rt 1024 CPU (arm based) - FreeRTOS (10.6) - Lwip (2.2) - Mbed TLS (3.6.2) LWIP supports Mbed TLS when adding defines in their configuration: /* ---------- TLS ------------------------- */ #define LWIP_ALTCP 1 #define LWIP_ALTCP_TLS 1 #define LWIP_ALTCP_TLS_MBEDTLS 1 But, unfortunately this supports an older version of Mbed TLS (I believe 2.2.x). When I try to compile against the Mbed TLS 3.6.2 libraries, I get a bunch of compiler warnings / errors. Most of them are mentioned in the migration guide, but even then, I have a hard time figuring out how to resolve them "the right way". 1. Private fields The migration guide <https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/mbedtls-3.6/docs/3.0-migration-gui…> explains that most structs are now considered private. 1.1: The altcp_mbed module in LWIP relies on the *out_left* field of the *ssl context* struct. /* calculate TLS overhead part to not send it to application */ overhead = state->overhead_bytes_adjust + state->ssl_context.out_left; I am correct that this field is simply not exposed through accessor functions? I can find functions like mbedtls_ssl_get_avail, so I would expect something like mbedtls_ssl_get_bytes_to_write or something like that? 1.2: The altcp_mbed module in LWIP relies on the *start* field of the *ssl session* struct. err_t altcp_tls_set_session(struct altcp_pcb *conn, struct altcp_tls_session *session) { if (session && conn && conn->state) { altcp_mbedtls_state_t *state = (altcp_mbedtls_state_t *)conn->state; int ret = -1; * if (session->data.start)* ret = mbedtls_ssl_set_session(&state->ssl_context, &session->data); return ret < 0 ? ERR_VAL : ERR_OK; } return ERR_ARG; } I also don't know how to obtain this field "the right way". I know this is a bad idea, but it's all I got if (session->data.*private_start)* ... 2. parse key expects a RNG function This is also explained in the migration guide: *Some functions gained an RNG parameterThis affects users of the following functions: `mbedtls_ecp_check_pub_priv()`,`mbedtls_pk_check_pair()`, `mbedtls_pk_parse_key()`, and`mbedtls_pk_parse_keyfile()`.You now need to pass a properly seeded, cryptographically secure RNG whencalling these functions. It is used for blinding, a countermeasure againstside-channel attacks.* Can you please give me some guidance here? I looked for examples in Mbed TLS repo and ended up with this (bold parts are added, using the key_app.c in your repo as leading example): * mbedtls_entropy_context entropy; mbedtls_ctr_drbg_context ctr_drbg; mbedtls_entropy_init(&entropy); mbedtls_ctr_drbg_init(&ctr_drbg); if ((ret = mbedtls_ctr_drbg_seed( &ctr_drbg, mbedtls_entropy_func, &entropy, privkey, privkey_len)) != 0) { // TODO: handle error } * ret = mbedtls_pk_parse_key( conf->pkey, privkey, privkey_len, privkey_pass, privkey_pass_len, *mbedtls_ctr_drbg_random, &ctr_drbg*); 3. The altcp_mbed module in LWIP relies on mbedtls_ssl_flush_output The altcp_mbed module had an include on ssl internal. #include "mbedtls/ssl_internal.h" /* to call mbedtls_flush_output after ERR_MEM */ This header seems no longer part of the library. But the prototype of the function is now part of ssl_misc.h, but I don't think I am supposed to rely on this header either. I have a couple of options: - ignore the compiler warning /home/dev_container/app/thirdparty/lwip/src/apps/altcp_tls/altcp_tls_mbedtls.c:535:5: warning: implicit declaration of function 'mbedtls_ssl_flush_output'; did you mean 'mbedtls_ssl_tls_prf'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 535 | mbedtls_ssl_flush_output(&state->ssl_context); - copy paste the declaration in the LWIP source file - Or.... don't flush any buffers managed by Mbed TLS in the first place? For the last one, I could really use your input. Can you say anything meaningful about the flush (line in bold) In the below function, Is it mandatory? Or can I trust the Mbed TLS will flush the output buffer whenever it needs to get flushed? /** Sent callback from lower connection (i.e. TCP) * This only informs the upper layer the number of ACKed bytes. * This now take care of TLS added bytes so application receive * correct ACKed bytes. */ static err_t altcp_mbedtls_lower_sent(void *arg, struct altcp_pcb *inner_conn, u16_t len) { struct altcp_pcb *conn = (struct altcp_pcb *)arg; LWIP_UNUSED_ARG(inner_conn); /* for LWIP_NOASSERT */ if (conn) { int overhead; u16_t app_len; altcp_mbedtls_state_t *state = (altcp_mbedtls_state_t *)conn->state; LWIP_ASSERT("state", state != NULL); LWIP_ASSERT("pcb mismatch", conn->inner_conn == inner_conn); /* calculate TLS overhead part to not send it to application */ mbedtls_ssl_get_bytes_avail(&state->ssl_context); overhead = state->overhead_bytes_adjust + state->ssl_context.private_out_left; if ((unsigned)overhead > len) { overhead = len; } /* remove ACKed bytes from overhead adjust counter */ state->overhead_bytes_adjust -= len; /* try to send more if we failed before (may increase overhead adjust counter) */ *mbedtls_ssl_flush_output(&state->ssl_context); // Does it make sense this LWIP port is responsible for flushing here??* /* remove calculated overhead from ACKed bytes len */ app_len = len - (u16_t)overhead; /* update application write counter and inform application */ if (app_len) { state->overhead_bytes_adjust += app_len; if (conn->sent) return conn->sent(conn->arg, conn, app_len); } } return ERR_OK; } After applying the changes I mentioned above, the software compiles against Mbed TLS. I haven't dared to run anything, I just want to enjoy this short moment where I have the feeling I achieved something before runtime errors ruin my day :). Many thanks in advance for any reply! Best regards, Bas [image: image.png]

1 year, 6 months

1
0
0 0

MbedTLS 2.5 vs MbedTLS 3.6

by Michael Khoyilar

Hi Team I am investigating the move from MbedTLS 2.25 to 3.6, however, our client uses the 2.25 currently (looks like they prefer to stay with it) and I need to provide convincing proof to move to 3.6 considering the upgrade issues that might arise. Any suggestions here that is convincing proof to do the migration to 3.6? I would appreciate your comments. Thanks Michael

1 year, 6 months

5
5
0 0

Trying to integrate Mbed TLS (3.6) with LWIP (2.x)

by Bas Prins

Dear Mbed TLS team, I am at the early steps of trying to integrate Mbed TLS with LWIP for our project (imx rt 1024 NXP micro, arm M7, running FreeRTOS and LWIP). I understand the basics of TLS, but I am far from an expert. Let me first apologise for the lengthy first email. I am afraid to leave out details. Feel free to skip directly to the end marked with: ============================= My questions: ============================= Some background / translation of how I think it (should) work: From a distance, I understand that LWIP has an abstraction layer on their TCP module, which can be used to integrate Mbed TLS. In fact, LWIP already did this, all I need to do is enable some directives (LWIP_ALTCP_TLS and LWIP_ALTCP_TLS_MBEDTLS). The implemented integration assumes a somewhat older version of Mbed TLS, so I have to adjust a couple to cope with the breaking changes from Mbed TLS 2.x to Mbed TLS 3.6.2. But other than that, integrating Mbed TLS would mean: - figure out which options i want to enable in Mbed TLS - cross compile it for our arm toolchain - extend our build scripts to compile against 3 static Mbed TLS libraries - figure out how to read the CA certificates, and provide them to Mbed TLS - test and fail, and hopefully be man enough to solve the challenges ahead... I haven't achieved much yet, but at least I managed to compile Mbed TLS with our toolchain and recompile our project against the linked libraries. This steps fails though, I get a bunch of linker errors : [100%] Linking CXX executable app.axf /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_msg.c.obj): in function `mbedtls_ssl_encrypt_buf': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c:1211:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_encrypt_buf+0x1b4): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_auth_encrypt_ext' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_msg.c.obj): in function `mbedtls_ssl_decrypt_buf': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c:1638:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_decrypt_buf+0x180): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_auth_decrypt_ext' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_msg.c.obj): in function `mbedtls_ssl_transform_free': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c:6213:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_transform_free+0x14): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_free' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_msg.c:6214:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_transform_free+0x1e): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_free' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_tls.c.obj): in function `mbedtls_ssl_transform_init': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:1028:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_transform_init+0x18): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_init' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:1029:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_transform_init+0x22): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_init' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_tls.c.obj): in function `mbedtls_ssl_get_mode_from_ciphersuite': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:2453:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_get_mode_from_ciphersuite+0x12): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_info_from_type' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_tls.c.obj): in function `mbedtls_ssl_parse_finished': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:8680:(.text.mbedtls_ssl_parse_finished+0xac): undefined reference to `mbedtls_ct_memcmp' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_tls.c.obj): in function `ssl_tls12_populate_transform': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:8878:(.text.ssl_tls12_populate_transform+0xa6): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_info_from_type' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:9136:(.text.ssl_tls12_populate_transform+0x454): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setup' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:9142:(.text.ssl_tls12_populate_transform+0x476): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setup' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:9148:(.text.ssl_tls12_populate_transform+0x4a8): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setkey' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls.c:9155:(.text.ssl_tls12_populate_transform+0x4da): undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setkey' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: CMakeFiles/app.dir/home/dev/app/thirdparty/lwip/src/apps/altcp_tls/altcp_tls_mbedtls.c.obj: in function `altcp_mbedtls_sndbuf': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/lwip/src/apps/altcp_tls/altcp_tls_mbedtls.c:1192:(.text.altcp_mbedtls_sndbuf+0x7e): undefined reference to `mbedtls_ssl_get_max_frag_len' /opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/13.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: /home/dev/app/source/iobox-app/../../thirdparty/mbedtls/build/library/libmbedtls.a(ssl_tls12_server.c.obj): in function `ssl_parse_client_psk_identity': /home/dev/app/thirdparty/mbedtls/library/ssl_tls12_server.c:3638:(.text.ssl_parse_client_psk_identity+0xb6): undefined reference to `mbedtls_ct_memcmp' The distinct list undefined references of the above: undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_auth_encrypt_ext' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_auth_decrypt_ext' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_free' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_init' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_info_from_type' undefined reference to `mbedtls_ct_memcmp' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setup' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setup' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setkey' undefined reference to `mbedtls_cipher_setkey' undefined reference to `mbedtls_ssl_get_max_frag_len' All except the last one are coming from Mbed TSL internally, so I *guess* this means I am missing options? Or maybe I am still having too many? The last one is called from the LWIP integration of Mbed TLS, and I could "sweep this under the carpet" by disabling "MBEDTLS_SSL_MAX_FRAGMENT_LENGTH". But I haven't looked further in what I cause if I do not support "RFC 6066 max_fragment_length extension in SSL" My Mbed TLS configuration: I followed the suggestion of your documentation, and went for a minimal example configuration. Pure on intuition, I went for "config-ccm-psk-dtls1_2.h". Because the file name suggests it brings TSL 1.2 which is basically all I need. I think. I did had to make the following changes in order to be able to compile it: 1. Comment out two defines in order to get rid of module requiring "windows or unix" //#define MBEDTLS_NET_C //#define MBEDTLS_TIMING_C 2. Add a define, again to get rid of the compiler error "require windows or unix" #define MBEDTLS_NO_PLATFORM_ENTROPY After applying these small changes to the include/mbedtls/mbedtls_config.h I was able to cross compile (and link) Mbed TLS with arm-none-eabi toolchain. Once I adjusted the build scripts to lnk against the Mbed TLS static libraries, I finally ended up with the earlier mentioned linker errors. ============================= My questions: ============================= 1. Does my starting point configuration make sense? As mentioned earlier, pure intuition made me try the "config-ccm-psk-dtls1_2.h" configuration example, which after some modifications compiled and produced 3 static libraries. but, this bit in the example header worries me a bit: * Distinguishing features: * - Optimized for small code size, low bandwidth (on an unreliable transport), * and low RAM usage. * - No asymmetric cryptography (no certificates, no Diffie-Hellman key * exchange). * - Fully modern and secure (provided the pre-shared keys are generated and * stored securely). * - Very low record overhead with CCM-8. * - Includes several optional DTLS features typically used in IoT. What does "no asymmetric cryptography" exactly mean? Isn't that the pure basis of TLS altogether? If I want to achieve HTTPS using TLS, is this a good starting point? 2. Undefined references: wrong configuration, or should I supply some of the implementations? As mentioned before, I have quite a few linking errors related to the cipher module. I tried to find answers in the documentation, but came up empty. I assume (again...) that I should be able to get rid of these linking errors by enabling more features in Mbed TLS. But I honestly get lost in #define's. And maybe it's documented somewhere, but I couldn't find it. 3. Root CA provided by me? I assume I *need* to provide at least one root CA for Mbed TLS to be able to verify the public key provided by the server, at some point, right? I would expect some callback I need to implement where such a root CA was read (in my case, i would have to read if from flash). Am I misunderstanding Mbed TLS on this aspect also? Or did I just miss the obvious spot where to Mbed TLS requests a root CA? 4. More examples available for typical microcontroller projects (FreeRTOS/LWIP)? My experience so far is: - Mbed TLS is well documented - LWIP is no longer actively maintained, and lacks documentation in general - Google finds a painful amount of LWIP/TLS integrations which are based on really old implementations of both, which does more harm than good for me - Chat GPT knows everything, even when it doesn't, which is a really great recipe to get on the wrong track... It doesn't seem rather helpful on my integration questions for Mbed TLS/LWIP. Disclaimer: could be that my lack of knowledge is causing gpt to come up with wrong answers of course... I understand that my email is (too?) long, and that the chance somebody will actually find the time to help me out is limited. I expect nothing, I hope for everything :) ANY help is more than welcome. Good references, links to official documentation I missed, or in the best case: answers to my questions/uncertainties. Many thanks in advance. Best regards, Bas

1 year, 6 months

2
1
0 0

Confirm if there is an upgrade to the PKCS#1 V2.2 standard.

by Elva Huang

Dear mbedtls platform, I would like to inquire whether the PKCS#1 standard in the source code of mbedtls V2.28.2 has been upgraded to V2.2. From which version does mbedtls start supporting PKCS#1 v2.2? Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Elva Huang | SW Engineer Tel: 18150372635 Email:elva.huang@robosense.cn<elva.huang(a)robosense.cn> 深圳市 - 南山区 - 速腾聚创产品中心 [image]<http://www.robosense.cn/> [image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/13232246/admin/>[image]<https://twitter.com/RoboSenseLiDAR>[image]<https://www.facebook.com/RoboSenseLiDAR/>[image]<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYCK8j678N6d_ayWE_8F3rQ>

1 year, 7 months

2
1
0 0

How to export mbedtls_snprintf ?

by Gal Rosen

Hi, I am trying to build lief which is dependent on mbedtls as a static library. I am using conan recipe to build using cmake. The build of the library succeeded, however later while trying to build my own application and link with lief I get the following error: LIEF.lib(x509.obj) : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol mbedtls_snprintf What do I do wrong? Or should I configure something while building the mbedtls library ? Thanks, Gal.

1 year, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Question about contribution of AES hardware support for RISC-V

by Rick Chen

Dear Mbed TLS maintainers, I have surveyed Mbed TLS and know that it has features which can improve AES block cipher performance by hardware instructions instead of SW implementation e.q., AESCE of ARMV8 and AESNI of INTEL. AS far as I know about RISC-V Cryptography extension(Zkne and Zknd), it also supports relevant AES instructions which can accelerate aes key schedule, encryption and decryption process. (https://tools.cloudbear.ru/docs/riscv-crypto-spec-scalar-1.0.0-rc6-20211012…) I want to ask for your opinions and agreement. Is there any willingness to accept this RISC-V accelerated feature idea and contribution to Mbed TLS ? If you agree with it, I would like to prepare a pull request for you to review. Sincerely, Rick

1 year, 8 months

2
1
0 0

Mbed TLS 3.6.2 release

by David Horstmann

Dear Mbed TLS users, We have released Mbed TLS version 3.6.2. This release provides a security fix for an out-of-bounds write vulnerability in the pkwrite module. Full details are available in the release notes: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.6.2 We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately. Many thanks, David Horstmann Mbed TLS developer

1 year, 8 months

1
0
0 0

Checking that RSA key and issuer certificate match using mbedTLS 3.x

by Fabian Keil

Hi, I'm currently working on adding mbedTLS 3.x support for Privoxy [0]. Everything seems to be working but I ifdef'ed out the following code in [1] that worked with mbedTLS 2.28.8: /* * Check if key and issuer certificate match */ if (!mbedtls_pk_can_do(&issuer_cert.pk, MBEDTLS_PK_RSA) || mbedtls_mpi_cmp_mpi(&mbedtls_pk_rsa(issuer_cert.pk)->N, &mbedtls_pk_rsa(*issuer_key)->N) != 0 || mbedtls_mpi_cmp_mpi(&mbedtls_pk_rsa(issuer_cert.pk)->E, &mbedtls_pk_rsa(*issuer_key)->E) != 0) { log_error(LOG_LEVEL_ERROR, "Issuer key doesn't match issuer certificate"); ret = -1; goto exit; } As N and E are private now it no longer compiles. Is there a way to implement the check with mbedTLS 3.x? My impression is that the sanity check is overly cautious and we don't have equivalent code for OpenSSL and wolfSSL but I'm curious. Thanks, Fabian [0] <https://www.privoxy.org/> [1] <https://www.privoxy.org/gitweb/?p=privoxy.git;a=blob;f=ssl.c;h=e8007cd9adad…>

1 year, 8 months

2
2
0 0

Client Certificate Request Question

by Michael Reutman

Hello, I'm running into an issue with using Mbed-TLS on an embedded device of ours and I'm curious if anyone would be able to point me in the right direction. If this is the wrong channel for general use questions, let me know and I'll search elsewhere. As a forewarning, I'm still getting my bearings around the nuts and bolts of Mbed-TLS and network security; apologies if I misstate something or jumble things up. Our device uses Mbed-TLS 3.0.0; ideally I'd like to upgrade this to a newer version, but this version was included in a SDK package for our device and I'd like to get some basic functionality proven out first before trying to reintegrate a newer version into the rest of provided code. The current goal is to get our device to serve a web page over HTTPS with TLS. What we currently see is that the initial hello client and server messages are exchanged without issue, but the connection is rejected after the server requests a certificate from the client. In some browsers, this opens a prompt where you can select a given certificate on the machine; in others, it skips this prompt and sends a response back with an empty certificate. In both instances, the server will return an error and deny the connection. This seems like some sort of user configuration error, given your average web page served over HTTPS on the internet avoids making this request. The literature I've been able to find so far also seems to suggest this request is entirely optional. Is there some option I'm overlooking that makes the server skip asking the client for its certificate and lets connection continue on? Michael Reutman Senior Embedded Software Engineer NovaTech Automation 261 Brodhead Rd. Bethlehem, PA 18017 novatechautomation.com<http://www.novatechautomation.com/> | NovaTechLinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/565017> NovaTech Automation is Net Zero committed. #KeepItCool<https://www.keepitcool.earth/> Receipt of this email implies compliance with our terms and conditions<https://www.novatechautomation.com/email-terms-conditions>.

1 year, 9 months

2
2
0 0

Problem when parsing certificate without Distinguished Name

by Diego Santos

Hi, I'm trying to parse this DER encoded certificate in hex format: 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 This certificate is part of a simple test for this specification https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/master/tls/tls.md I'm using this https://github.com/status-im/nim-mbedtls Nim language library wrapper for mbedtls. I don't know the mbedtls version exactly, but the lib is based on this commit https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/tree/09d23786f6fdcb4dfa88aad30c8767bd27…. In my code I use: proc parseUnverified*(derInput: seq[byte]) = var crt: mbedtls_x509_crt mbedtls_x509_crt_init(addr crt) var ret = mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_der(addr crt, unsafeAddr derInput[0], derInput.len.uint) if ret != 0: raise newException(Exception, "Failed to parse certificate, error code: " & $ret) which is a straightforward version of the C code, but ti fails with: Failed to parse certificate, error code: -9186 [Exception] It seems the problem is because the certificate doesn't have the Distinguished Name set. Does it make sense? If this is really the cause of the problem, is there any workaround? Regards.

1 year, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Need Info : mbedtls_x509_get_sig_alg API

by Satya Prakash Prasad

Hi, We were using old MBed TLS version 2.19.1 and existing trusted CA certificates were working fine in that release. Recently we upgraded to 3.6.0 and see that now certificate parsing is returning -ox262e value from function mbedtls_x509_get_sig_alg cause of which handshake is not even initiated. Can you please let us know what can cause such an issue and remedy the same? Regards, Prakash

1 year, 9 months

1
2
0 0

Looking for suggestions about make Mbed TLS APIs non-secure callable APIs on armv8m

by Lee, William

Hi Mbed TLS, I am looking for some suggestions about make some (or all) Mbed TLS APIs non-secure callable APIs on armv8m. The background is that I am going to have a secure firmware that provides encryption services by building part (or whole) of Mbed TLS into that firmware and make those original mbedtls_x APIs non-secure callable, so the existing non-secure firmware could link those non-secure callable APIs and use them. Some of my thoughts: (1) The easiest way to do it I can think of is just add the attribute "cmse_nonsecure_call" to those APIs' declaration (or use a macro to wrap the attribute for conditional build to not impact others don't want it), but I do not think this modification could be accepted by upstream 🙂. (2) So my another thought is duplicate all header files and put them under another folder, assuming it is my-include folder, then I can do whatever I want to my-include folder, but there is also a problem I can think of: a merge/compare burden between include and my-include folder after I have updated Mbed TLS. I really appreciate other suggestions! Thanks, William

1 year, 9 months

3
3
0 0

Reminder: MBed TLS Tech Forum - US/Europe

by Don Harbin

Hi All, A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum is next Monday at 4:30pm UK time. Invite details can be found on the online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>. If you have any topics, please let Janos know. :) Don

1 year, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Setting ciphersuite causes MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_ILLEGAL_PARAMETER

by Mbed TLS

My mbedtls client has been working for 2 years. It did what I required and has been stable. However, I now need to force a new server to use my preferred cipher suite. I found the helper function to force the cipher suite here: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/de4d5b78558666d2e258d95e6c5875f9c7… I added mbedtls_ssl_conf_preference_order(conf, MBEDTLS_SSL_SRV_CIPHERSUITE_ORDER_CLIENT) to the end of the function to force the server to choose my ciphersuite. Prior to this change I called the mbedtls functions in this chronological order: mbedtls_ssl_init(&_ssl); mbedtls_ssl_config_init(&_conf); mbedtls_ctr_drbg_init(&_ctr_drbg); mbedtls_entropy_init(&_entropy); mbedtls_x509_crt_init(&_cacert); mbedtls_pk_init(&_pkey); mbedtls_ctr_drbg_seed mbedtls_ssl_config_defaults mbedtls_ssl_conf_rng mbedtls_ssl_conf_authmode mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_file mbedtls_ssl_conf_ca_chain mbedtls_ssl_setup mbedtls_ssl_set_hostname and then proceed to call: mbedtls_ssl_set_bio mbedtls_ssl_handshake Now: If I call mbedtls_ssl_conf_ciphersuites BEFORE mbedtls_ssl_config_defaults, the ciphersuite list is ignored/seems to get overriden. If I call mbedtls_ssl_conf_ciphersuites AFTER mbedtls_ssl_config_defaults, my ciphersuite list changes are accepted and transmitted (I can see in Wireshark). The server then responds agreeing to use my chosen cipher suite. However, mbedtls_ssl_handshake returns with value -26112, which I have looked up to be MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_ILLEGAL_PARAMETER. Unfortunately I have no clue what is causing this. Could somebody please advise how this should be done? I can see Client2 example but there are functions I have which are not in there. Client1 seems too simple for me but Client2 seems beyond what I require.

1 year, 9 months

2
5
0 0

Connect using IP address instead of URL "509 - Certificate verification failed, e.g. CRL, CA or signature check failed"

by M M

I am using MbedTLS client code based on this: https://github.com/machinezone/IXWebSocket/blob/master/ixwebsocket/IXSocket… I am connecting to a server via it's URL. However, I would like to connect directly using an IP address returned from running the traceroute command on the URL. So I replaced the URL with the IP address. However, MBedTLS fails on the handshake: https://github.com/machinezone/IXWebSocket/blob/master/ixwebsocket/IXSocket… I get the error: "error in handshake : X509 - Certificate verification failed, e.g. CRL, CA or signature check failed" If I revert back to URL, it works. The IP address does exist. How can I connect using the IP address, instead of the URL?

1 year, 9 months

3
3
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020