Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
FYI to all TF dev teams leveraging Open CI.
Best regards,
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Glen Valante via Tf-openci-triage <
tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 at 08:41
Subject: [Tf-openci-triage] FYI; Cambridge Lab Down
To: tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <
tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Hello All;
FYI; the Cambridge lab took a serious power hit and is down. They are
scrambling to get things back up, but it may take all weekend.
Expect LAVA failures and other strange results.
Thanks;
-g
--
[image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org>
Glen Valante | *Director Program & Project Management*
T: +1.508.517.3461 <1617-320-5000>
glen.valante(a)linaro.org | Skype: gvalante <callto:gvalante>
--
Tf-openci-triage mailing list -- tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
tf-openci-triage-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Dear sir/madam,
Hope you are doing good!
We are working on a lightweight TLS implementation for embedded hardware
and want to add our own algorithm inside mbedTLS. As per my knowledge, we
have to add a .h file in mbedtls/include/mbedtls and .c file in the
library. Also, we have to list our algorithm in library/CMakeLists.txt.
Except these, what should be the procedure?
Also, our task is during handshake, the receiver chooses our algorithm
instead of the default one for encryption and decryption. If someone could
help us regarding this then it would be great.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
--
*Dr. Vishal J. Rathod*
*(Member - IEEE, ACM, IET)*
*Senior Project Engineer (SPE),*
*IoT R & D Group,*
*C-DAC, Electronic City,*
*Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.*
*Email ID: rathodvishal78(a)gmail.com <rathodvishal78(a)gmail.com> and *
vishalrathod(a)ieee.org
*Mobile - 9879957770*
Hi!
I am a new MbedTLS user and would like to say thanks to devs first!
From my point of view mbedtls_net_connect() could handle binding socket to a specified local client port.
Although it does not seem to be a common requirement and bloats API a little bit but otherwise user has to throw away mbedtls_net_connect()
and implement connection function by their hands.
Best,
Alex
Hi Ruchika,
as an addition to the previous answers, there is also the SecureMark-TLS benchmark from EEMBC that "Analyzes the costs associated with implementing TLS on an edge device using a common IoT cyphersuite comprised of ECC & ECDSA on the NIST secp256r1 curve, SHA256, and AES128-CCM/ECB", see: https://www.eembc.org/securemark/
It provides profiles to run benchmarks against Mbed TLS API, PSA Crypto API, and wolfSSL, see sources here: https://github.com/eembc/securemark-tls/tree/main/examples/selfhosted/profi…
The chosen cipher-suite is similar to the TF-M medium profile and it allows estimates of speed and power consumption for TLS on microcontrollers. It also allows to add - manually - footprint data.
Best
Stephan
From: Ruchika Gupta via psa-crypto <psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta_1(a)nxp.com>
Date: Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 13:40
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>, "psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [psa-crypto] Benchmark application for PSA crypto API's
Hi,
For mbedtls API’s, there is a benchmark application available. Are there any plans to implement benchmark application for PSA crypto APIs ?
Regards,
Ruchika
Hi,
For mbedtls API's, there is a benchmark application available. Are there any plans to implement benchmark application for PSA crypto APIs ?
Regards,
Ruchika
Hello,
In mbedLS v3.4.0, I came across a build error that there are no members for type and flag in psa_core_keyattributes_t structure.
The following functions in psa_crypto_core.h access private members type and flag of psa_core_keyattributes_t structure without the MBEDTLS_PRIBATE() private access.
* psa_is_key_slot_occupied()
* psa_key_slot_get_flags()
* psa_key_slot_set_flags()
* psa_key_slot_set_bits_in_flags()
* psa_key_slot_clear_bits()
Updating to private access for attribute struct members in psa_crypto_core.h fixed the build errors.
Regards,
Archanaa
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
This event has been canceled with a note:
"Cancelled due to Bank Holiday"
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Monday May 8, 2023 ⋅ 8:30am – 9:30am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
nnac123(a)gmail.com
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hello,
To strengthen Mbed TLS against accidental misuse, we're going to enforce
a minimum size for RSA key generation. Currently the minimum is 128
bits, just to avoid some edge cases in the implementation. So for
example, if you want a 2048-bit key but accidentally pass a number of
bytes, the library will happily generate a 256-bit key. We want to
prevent this scenario.
What should the minimum be? If we make the minimum 2048 bits, will this
be a problem? We will not make the minimum any higher. But we're
considering enforcing only a minimum 1024 bits, which is over the record
from public breaks and largely resolves the risk of bits/bytes confusion.
Should we also enforce a minimum (perhaps lower) in the 2.28 long-time
support branch?
If you're using Mbed TLS to generate small RSA keys, please let us know
on the mailing list, on GitHub at
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/7556, or by private email.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Every 4 weeks from 9:30am to 10:30am on Monday
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
nnac123(a)gmail.com
View all guest info
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=ZGExMnNqcDB1MDFm…
Reply for mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and view more details
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=ZGExMnNqcDB1MDFm…
Your attendance is optional.
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hello,
using mbed TLS pavkaged with esp32 toolchain, for doing eap-tls with server certificate verification using CA cert.
Mbed TLS rejects certificate in mbedtls_x509_crt_check_key_usage (x509_crt.c), because usage_may variable is 0.
usage is set by mbedtls_ssl_check_cert_usage (ssl_tls.c) to MBEDTLS_X509_KU_DIGITAL_SIGNATURE because my keys are ECDHE-ECDSA.
Is this the expected behaviour ?
Thanks in advance
François
Hello,
I was working on packaging up mbedtls for [tea, a new package manager](https://tea.xyz/) and ran into an error validating the built products. I was hoping maybe someone more knowledgeable could take a quick look.
I followed the homebrew formula here: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/af8e7e97432944a65c0f985132a7…
Here's the PR for adding it to tea: https://github.com/teaxyz/pantry/pull/1822
For some reason I'm not getting the expected checksum from `generic_sum`. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!
-Joe
Hi Team,
I want to implement TLS over UART using MbedTLS library, But the issue i am facing right now is There are no example codes or any reference document for briefing how to import the libraries and what changes should be done to do so.
I tried to use some examples for Lwip examples but i am getting errors while importing library like platform error, timing_alt.h error.
Please help me out in urgent.
Thanks !!
I have created an http server following the example for server1 under FreeRTOS and Lwip running on a STM32H753 using the Stm32CubeIDE. Everything seem to work correctly, however, I am experiencing a small memory leak over each successive TLS connection of 160 bytes. It is obvious that I must not be freeing a context, but as I am following the example very closely, except for running the code in a FreeRTOS thread, I must be missing something fundemental. Has anyone on this list experienced a similar issue or have any ideas on how to debug it?
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next Monday at 10:00am PM UK time. Invite details can be found on
the online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi
What's the best way to shutdown a network connection for when say an embedded device is shutting down or going to reboot?
I have the following code I call when I am going to kick off a reboot:
LOG_DEBUG("Network Manager: Ethernet is going down%s", networkManager->rebootInProgress ? "..." : " for reconfiguration...");
netifapi_dhcp_release_and_stop(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
netifapi_netif_set_link_down(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
netifapi_netif_set_down(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
networkManager->ethernetLinkUp = false;
if (networkManager->rebootInProgress)
{
netifapi_netif_remove(&networkManager->networkInterfaceContext);
}
The trouble is that the link seems to come back up again as soon as it goes down and my state machine starts doing stuff like kicking off a new DHCP request etc, right about the time the hardware reboots.
I added in the call to netifapi_netif_remove() quite recently but it doesn't seem to make any difference.
I could put some more code in my link status state machine for an impending reboot, but this seems more complicated than it probably needs to be, as I'm probably not doing something I should be.
Gary Metalle
Senior Embedded Software Engineer
Hello,
What is the extent of PSA Crypto API 1.1 support available in mbedTLS today?
From the road map, API v1.0 is supported. I also see that PBKDF, which is in PSA API v1.1, is in development.
Regards,
Archanaa
This event has been canceled with a note:
"Bank Holiday - Cancelling "
MBed TLS Technical Forum
Monday Apr 10, 2023 ⋅ 8:30am – 9:30am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
Guests
nnac123(a)gmail.com
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi Mbed TLS users,
We have released Mbed TLS versions 3.4.0 and 2.28.3
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and bring other minor changes. Full details are available in the release notes.
(https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.4.0, https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.3).
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
The Mbed TLS team
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
hello,
I am currently evaluating if latest mbed-TLS release does support following algorithms:
- ECDSA using secp521r1 curve
- EDDSA using Edwards curves 448 or 448-Goldilocks
- ECDH using mentioned curves
- SHA512
- SHAKE256
For some of them like SHA512 I found information in the documentation. Others like EDDSA and SHAKE256 seem to be incomplete. Is my assumption correct that TLS 1.3 is therefore NOT ready to use yet?
Best regards,
Chris
Hello everyone,
We are currently using the mbedTLS version 2.16.12 in our firmware and we are planning an update to a newer branch. I would like to know, how long the different 3.x branches will be supported.
Is there any fix roadmap, how long an mbedTLS branch must be supported and maintained after its first release? I could only find this information for the 2.28 branch (support until end of 2024).
Thank you for any help you can offer.
Best regards
Maher Azarkan
Hilscher Gesellschaft f?r Systemautomation mbH
Rheinstra?e 15 / D-65795 Hattersheim / Germany
Sitz der Gesellschaft / place of business: Hattersheim | Gesch?ftsf?hrer / managing director: Sebastian Hilscher, Hans-J?rgen Hilscher
Handelsregister / commercial register: Frankfurt B 26873 | Ust. Idnr. / VAT No.: DE113852715 Registergericht / register court: Amtsgericht Frankfurt/Main
Important Information:
This e-mail message including its attachments contains confidential and legally protected information solely intended for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please contact the addresser immediately and delete this message including its attachments. The unauthorized dissemination, copying and change of this e-mail are strictly forbidden. The addresser shall not be liable for the content of such changed e-mails.
Wichtiger Hinweis:
Diese E-Mail einschlie?lich ihrer Anh?nge enth?lt vertrauliche und rechtlich gesch?tzte Informationen, die nur f?r den Adressaten bestimmt sind. Sollten Sie nicht der bezeichnete Adressat sein, so teilen Sie dies bitte dem Absender umgehend mit und l?schen Sie diese Nachricht und ihre Anh?nge. Die unbefugte Weitergabe, das Anfertigen von Kopien und jede Ver?nderung der E-Mail ist untersagt. Der Absender haftet nicht f?r Inhalte von ver?nderten E-Mails.
Dear all,
I need to migrate from OpenSSL to MbedTLS.
I have to implement a SCEP client in my embedded environment composed by FreeRTOS as OS, mbedTLS as security layer and LwIP as network stack.
The best candidate for the SCEP client role is the sscep library. It works very well under Ubuntu, but now I need to use it in my embedded environment, so I have to adapt sscep for MbedTLS.
I would like to know if there is some porting/migration guide from OpenSSL to MbedTLS.
Any kind of suggestion or support will be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Matteo
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next Monday at 10:00am PM UK time. Invite details can be found on
the online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
security issue in mbedtls 3.30 in the release notes:
"An adversary with access to precise enough information about memory
accesses (typically, an untrusted operating system attacking a secure
enclave) could recover an RSA private key after observing the victim
performing a single private-key operation if the window size used for the
exponentiation was 3 or smaller. Found and reported by Zili KOU,
Wenjian HE, Sharad Sinha, and Wei ZHANG. See "Cache Side-channel Attacks
and Defenses of the Sliding Window Algorithm in TEEs" - Design, Automation
and Test in Europe 2023."
was this issue solved in this version?
Hello,
I have 3rd party custom ECC library, that can do ECDSA verification and uses secp256r1 compressed public key (33bytes) to do so - all works fine.
Now I want to migrate to mbedTLS, to also benefit of other crypto schemes, hence use of mbedtls ECDSA was a natural way to go.
Here I need (as I understand) PEM parser or optionally public key in uncompressed format (0x04 | X | Y).
Problem is that loading of the key seems to work (func returns 0), but verification fails with -20450, indicating (if I well understood) invalid signature.
Test data.
PRIVATE KEY:
-----BEGIN PRIVATE KEY-----
MIGHAgEAMBMGByqGSM49AgEGCCqGSM49AwEHBG0wawIBAQQgKNqyWso/lMuTlTE6
ll47Jboqq/Iz7OYDrr7TuXN+s2ChRANCAARNgfaUcxLoWWG01ekJFiqB8ujMgnHz
P320ZgiZErH6zKjlB9EovIHrchj0240+EIpFios+2uM609FgRvu3+NrT
-----END PRIVATE KEY-----
PUBLIC KEY:
-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----
MDkwEwYHKoZIzj0CAQYIKoZIzj0DAQcDIgADTYH2lHMS6FlhtNXpCRYqgfLozIJx
8z99tGYImRKx+sw=
-----END PUBLIC KEY-----
PUBLIC KEY UNCOMPRESSED SEC1:
0x4,0x4d,0x81,0xf6,0x94,0x73,0x12,0xe8,0x59,0x61,0xb4,0xd5,0xe9,0x9,0x16,0x2a,0x81,0xf2,0xe8,0xcc,0x82,0x71,0xf3,0x3f,0x7d,0xb4,0x66,0x8,0x99,0x12,0xb1,0xfa,0xcc,0xa8,0xe5,0x7,0xd1,0x28,0xbc,0x81,0xeb,0x72,0x18,0xf4,0xdb,0x8d,0x3e,0x10,0x8a,0x45,0x8a,0x8b,0x3e,0xda,0xe3,0x3a,0xd3,0xd1,0x60,0x46,0xfb,0xb7,0xf8,0xda,0xd3
PUBLIC KEY COMPRESSED SEC1:
0x3,0x4d,0x81,0xf6,0x94,0x73,0x12,0xe8,0x59,0x61,0xb4,0xd5,0xe9,0x9,0x16,0x2a,0x81,0xf2,0xe8,0xcc,0x82,0x71,0xf3,0x3f,0x7d,0xb4,0x66,0x8,0x99,0x12,0xb1,0xfa,0xcc
INPUT STRING in TEXT format:
"This is my input data" (remove quotes)
INPUT STRING in HEX format:
0x54,0x68,0x69,0x73,0x20,0x69,0x73,0x20,0x6d,0x79,0x20,0x69,0x6e,0x70,0x75,0x74,0x20,0x64,0x61,0x74,0x61
SHA256 of INPUT STRING:
0xa7,0x3f,0x26,0xf4,0xa1,0xe4,0x61,0x61,0x0,0x1a,0x29,0xdf,0xd2,0xaf,0x7d,0xa,0x25,0x91,0xbb,0xcc,0x1f,0xbc,0xfb,0xdb,0x43,0xdb,0x57,0xf9,0x8d,0x94,0xeb,0x81
(x-checked here: https://emn178.github.io/online-tools/sha256.html)
SIGNATURE of HASH signed with PRIVATE KEY:
0x80,0xe6,0xf5,0x97,0x6a,0x66,0xa2,0xe2,0x9a,0xd7,0x7f,0x9a,0x9b,0x3e,0x2b,0xde,0x1f,0x7c,0x3,0xb3,0x1,0xb8,0x6f,0xd8,0xf6,0xf,0x27,0x38,0x63,0x3,0x54,0x74,0x76,0x6d,0x1b,0x97,0xf0,0xbc,0xc5,0xd2,0x4b,0xae,0xf0,0x34,0xab,0x86,0xbd,0x55,0x0,0x8a,0x4c,0x9f,0x4e,0xa5,0x53,0x89,0xe8,0x0,0xb9,0x83,0x24,0x87,0x98,0x1
My custom library code looks like - this one works as expected:
if (ecdsa_verify(public_key_compressed_33_bytes_array, hash_of_input_string, signature_signed_with_private_key)) {
printf("Custom ECDSA lib verification is OK\r\n");
}
My mbedTLS code looks like:
```
/* mbedTLS */
printf("mbedTLS way start\r\n");
mbedtls_ecdsa_init(&ctx);
mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&ctx.private_grp, MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1);
res = mbedtls_ecp_point_read_binary(&ctx.private_grp, &ctx.private_Q, ecc_public_key_uncompressed_bin,
sizeof(ecc_public_key_uncompressed_bin));
if (res != 0) {
printf("ECP point read binary failed: %d\r\n", res);
}
res = mbedtls_ecdsa_read_signature(&ctx, data_raw_hash_digest, sizeof(data_raw_hash_digest), signature,
sizeof(signature));
if (res == 0) {
printf("mbedTLS Verification is OK...\r\n");
} else {
printf("mbedTLS Verification failed...: %d\r\n", res);
}
printf("mbedTLS way end\r\n");
```
and it always fails with error code -20450. while loading keys function goes through well.
Am I wrongly loading the keys?
Hi, I recently had to do some PKCS#7 signature validation and was
disappointed to find that it didn't just work. After digging through
RFCs to figure out the myriad of things I'd done wrong I was also left
with a lack of 3 features in mbedtls:
1. The full certificate chain was not being loaded and explicitly not
supported. I believe this is in error since the certificate was never
actually used anywhere, meaning it basically errored out for no reason.
Since this certificate chain also contains the key used to validate the
signature in my case that presented a pretty fundamental problem.
2. signedAttributes were not supported at all.
3. All the fields in mbedtls_pkcs7 and its associated structures are
marked as MBEDTLS_PRIVATE. I need to inspect both the certificates and
the signedAttributes and would rather not have to parse the entire DER
myself.
I have attached patches implementing the first two. I believe I've done
so without altering the behavior of the calls although I'm a bit unsure
as to why mbedtls_x509_crt_verify doesn't take a const mbedtls_x509_crt.
The third issue is a matter of policy and I don't know what your opinion
on it is. For the moment I can at least get away with poking at the
internal fields.
I have tested it on several signatures, one of which I have included
here and I apologize in advance for the absolute spew but I thought it
better than attaching even more files.
The data:
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
It's SHA2-256 hash is:
C76DE7AF191C16E01405CE8FE89136EB60AC035B3DDE34ACF65220AC7C3CA619
If you decode the signature DER you'll see a matching id-messageDigest
in the signedAttributes towards the very bottom.
The signature in DER format:
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
886F70D010701301C06092A864886F70D010905310F170D3233303230393231333032345A302806092A864886F70D010934311B3019300B0609608648016503040201A10A06082A8648CE3D040302302F06092A864886F70D01090431220420C76DE7AF191C16E01405CE8FE89136EB60AC035B3DDE34ACF65220AC7C3CA619300A06082A8648CE3D04030204473045022100EE9B221CD9B5EEB1C6AF4160128D099C9414440A96C855A789846599E3BDE442022005AE51DC947E0B2AA6593E8FDB9F888782C71E5BB1CB6BF3C32B79C448C6A75D
Joakim
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the Asia-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech
forum is next *Monday, Feb 27th at 10:00am UK time*. Invite details can be
found on the online calendar here
<https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
As usual, if anyone has any topics, please let Dave Rodgman, cc'd, know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi,
I'm using AES 128 GCM with TLS 1.2 and trying to understand the AES key expansion code for decrypting received SSL records.
I'm not an expert on AES but as I understand it, we use the IV (4 byte salt + 8 byte explicit nonce in the received message), pad to 16 bytes, increment and use this as input to the AES key expansion for the first block of ciphertext. This produces a round key per AES round (10 rounds for AES 128). We then increment our IV as input to the key expansion and generate the rounding keys for the next block.
I noticed aesni_setkey_enc_128 in aesni.c contains the Intel AES-NI instruction AESKEYGENASSIST which helps with key expansion.
However, what's confusing me is when I add a breakpoint in GDB, this function is only called once, via mbedtls_ctr_drbg_seed in ctr_drbg.c. I thought we need to do the key expansion on every block, to generate the round keys?
I kept looking at the code and I noticed mbedtls_aesni_crypt_ecb, which contains the Intel AES-NI instructions for performing decryption.
This loads the round key via ctx->buf + ctx->rk_offset but I do not see any code updating this round key per block.
Could someone please explain where the round keys are generated for each round, per block?
Thanks,
Hi All,
I have a couple of tasks which use LWIP and which get suspended for a
few seconds during TLS RSA/EC crypto. One (a primitive http server)
uses Netconn and the other (a serial to TCP data copy process) uses
sockets.
I also have a number of tasks which don't do any networking and which
run as they should, throughout. Experimentation of what priority these
need is difficult but it looks like it needs to be at/above the tasks
which invoke TLS. If their priority is 0 then TLS hangs them up as
well.
After much experimentation with RTOS priorities, this is what I found,
and I wonder if it is right:
TCP/IP applications (whether using the LWIP Netconn API or the LWIP
socket API) should run at a priority equal to or lower than that of
LWIP itself which [in this project] is osPriorityHigh (40). TCP/IP
applications can be run with a priority all the way down to
tskIDLE_PRIORITY (0).
The exception is if TLS is in use. TLS does not yield to the RTOS; you
get a solid CPU time lump of ~3 secs (STM 32F417, hardware AES only).
TLS starts in the priority of the task which invokes it, but
subsequent TLS-driven TCP/IP operations run at the priority of LWIP.
So when TLS is doing the session setup crypto, tasks of a priority
lower than LWIP get suspended. If this gap is an issue, the priority
of the relevant tasks should be equal to LWIP's. Furthermore, due to
the structure of LWIP, the priority of a task using it should not be
higher than LWIP (24) since it might cause blocking on socket (or
netconn) writes.
Does this make sense?
It looks like LWIP blocks all netconn and socket ops when TLS is using
it. Is that possible?
I am running with
#define LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING 0
#define LWIP_ALLOW_MEM_FREE_FROM_OTHER_CONTEXT 1
#define SYS_LIGHTWEIGHT_PROT 1
as this was found to have much better granularity for task switching.
With LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING=1 you end up with a crude mutex across
the entire API call, which is fine in a single RTOS task.
Thank you in advance for any pointers.
Peter
Hi Team,
I have a requirement to generate self signed certificate programmatically.
I have raw EDCSA key pairs generated via OP-TEE APIs.
I m trying to generate self signed certificate. I tried the example as shown in programs/x509/cert_write.c. This doesn't work for me as I have raw key pairs where as this expects the key pairs to be in either pem/der format.
I tried the following code but it throws error "0xffffdd00" when I call mbedtls_x509write_crt_der
Code to set the raw key pairs:
mbedtls_ecdh_context issuer_ctx;
mbedtls_ecdh_init(&issuer_ctx);
ret = mbedtls_ecdh_setup(&issuer_ctx, MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP384R1);
if (ret != 0) {
goto exit;
}
res = TA_ECSetPublicKey(&issuer_ctx, public_keyX, public_key_Y, 48);
if (res != TEE_SUCCESS)
{
goto exit;
}
res = TA_ECSetPrivateKey(&issuer_ctx, private_key, 48);
if (res != TEE_SUCCESS)
{
goto exit;
}
Am I doing something wrong ? Please help
It would be very helpful if some working example of generating certificate programmatically is shared for my reference
Thanks,
Prithvi
Hello,
In our project we use mbedTLS together with freeRTOS. mbedTLS requires an mbedtls_ssl_context (let's say `ssl_context`) for the send (`mbedtls_ssl_write(...)`) and receive (`mbedtls_ssl_read(...)`) functions. In our project we have a freeRTOS task `A` to send data with mbedTLS and a freeRTOS task `B`to receive data with mbedTLS over the same session/interface. Both tasks use the same `ssl_context` instance. Potentially sending and receiving can happen at the same time.
Is it safe to use the same `ssl_context` instance from both taks? Or should only one task access the `ssl_context`?
At the moment we are using `mbedtls_ssl_read(...)` in blocking mode and hence the `ssl_context` cannot be protected against multiple access with a mutex because then the sending task cannot obtain the mutex as long as the receiving task is the blocked receiving state (holding the mutext).
Thank you for your help.
Best regards,
Pascal
Hello,
We intend to remove DES (including Triple-DES) in the next major version
of Mbed TLS, i.e. Mbed TLS 4.0. We do not yet have a release date, but
at the moment it seems likely that there will be a new major version in
2024. As usual, the Mbed TLS 3.x series will keep the current support
for DES, and we intend to maintain the last 3.x minor release as a
long-term support branch for 3 years.
Rationale: Most security standards deprecate DES if they do not forbid
it already. Tooling is widely available to switch to AES or other
cipher. In particular, NIST will forbid Triple-DES except to decrypt
legacy data after 31 December 2023 (following SP 800-131A
<https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-131Ar2.pdf>).
We would like to remove the last 64-bit block cipher from Mbed TLS to
simplify some parts of the code and reduce the maintenance burden.
If you wish for Mbed TLS to keep supporting DES longer, please let us
know what your business case is, either by replying to this email or on
the GitHub issue: https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/7024
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Dear MbedTLS dev,
I am writing an opaque driver (equivalent of PSA_CRYPTO_TEST_DRIVER_LOCATION/PSA_KEY_PERSISTENCE_READ_ONLY in the test suite) with the PSA API compiled with MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_BUILTIN_KEYS.
But I am not sure if I have to use "psa_import_key" before "psa_driver_wrapper_sign_message" or if I have to "read/generate" the builtin key on the fly, at each psa_driver_wrapper_* operation ?
Would it be possible to add this example in the test suite ? Or explain how builtin key + opaque driver is supposed to be used with, for example, "psa_driver_wrapper_sign_message" ?
I put more details below.
Thank you in advance,
Best regards,
Rehan
#############################################################################
I would like to write an example doing :
I) psa_sign_message (ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256)
II) psa_export_public_key
III) psa_verify_message (with the public key from II)
I am following the examples provided by the test suite, especially :
1) sign_message transparent driver: calculate in driver ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256
using the API :
- psa_import_key
- psa_sign_message
with the attributes :
- key_type = PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR(PSA_ECC_FAMILY_SECP_R1)
2) PSA opaque driver builtin pubkey export: secp256r1
using the API :
- psa_export_public_key
with the attributes :
- key_id = MBEDTLS_PSA_KEY_ID_BUILTIN_MIN + 1
- key_type = PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR(PSA_ECC_FAMILY_SECP_R1)
and the driver code :
- platform_builtin_keys.c : mbedtls_psa_platform_get_builtin_key() (PSA_KEY_PERSISTENCE_READ_ONLY, PSA_CRYPTO_TEST_DRIVER_LOCATION)
- test_driver_key_management.c : mbedtls_test_opaque_export_public_key()
3) verify_message transparent driver: calculate in driver ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256
using the API :
- psa_import_key
- psa_verify_message
with the attributes :
- key_type = PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR(PSA_ECC_FAMILY_SECP_R1)
It seems to me that II)=2) and 3) should be pretty similar to III) because I assume that neither transparent vs opaque, nor PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_KEY_PAIR vs PSA_KEY_TYPE_ECC_PUBLIC_KEY_BASE, is gonna change much here.
But the signature I) is less clear... Has the built-in key feature been thought such that the read-only key is read each time we call a different PSA API function ?
Long story short, an "opaque driver + builtin keys" equivalent of the "sign_message transparent driver: calculate in driver ECDSA SECP256R1 SHA-256" example in the test-suite would be really helpful :)
Hello,
Is it possible to use PSA crypto APIs for SHA256 and RSA signature verification for RH850F1KMS1 microcontroller from renesas which has G3KH cpu core.
Let me know your thoughts.
Thank you in advance.
Regards,
Ujjwal
Hello,
I am writing this mail in order to get support.
I am using RH850-F1KMS1 microcontroller from Renesas, and I need to integrate mbed to perform SHA256 and RSA-1024 digital signature verification.
The controller is bare metal and does not have any OS like freeRTOS.
Just want to understand how to integrate mbed code in our project.
Thank you in advance for the help.
Regards,
Ujjwal
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Dave,
Please keep in mind that next Monday is a Federal Holiday in the US, so
this may impact attendance.
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello,
You are concerned if: you contribute to Mbed TLS, or you maintain local patches to Mbed TLS.
You are not concerned if: you just use Mbed TLS.
We are going to change the C coding style in Mbed TLS. The new style is mostly what you'd find in The C Programming Language, 2nd edition, by Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie (K&R2). The main changes compared to the current style are:
* Spaces outside parentheses, not inside. No space in f(x).
* Opening braces on the same line as if(), for(), etc., but on a separate line for functions.
Indentation remains 4 spaces. The recommended maximum line length remains 80 columns. There are a few deviations from K&R2, documentation will be available shortly.
The new code style will be enforced by the CI testing. This means that style that's rejected by the tool will not be merged, full stop. This also means that sometimes we'll have code that looks a bit less good to humans because the tool insists on it. We're doing this to avoid wasting reviewers' and contributors' time with style violations in code review.
The tool we're using is uncrustify<https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify>. You can see how your code will look like by installing uncrustify 0.75.1 and running scripts/code_style.py from mbedtls-3.3.0 or mbedtls-2.28.2. There are previews of the rewritten branches at https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/tree/features/new-code-style/development and https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/tree/features/new-code-style/mbedtls-2.… (updated every few days until the real branches are rewritten). If you're now starting work on a new feature or bugfix, it will probably be easier to start from those branches, and do an easy rebase once they become official.
If you've been working on a branch, we will provide a script to rebase the branch and rewrite it to the new style commit by commit. You'll need to have uncrustify 0.75.1.
Concretely, when we change the code style:
* If you've started to work on a branch but review has not started yet, we'll ask you to adapt your branch to the new code style.
* If your work is under review, you'll need to adapt your branch to the new code style before it can be merged. Rebasing a branch is disruptive for reviews, so please synchronize with the reviewers to decide on a good time.
We plan to do the switch during the first week of January 2023.
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi All,
I raised the issue below in the MBED-TLS github, as per suggestion from the moderator asking it in the mailing-list. Below are the details.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/issues/6864
I am running Mbed TLS as a core security library(2.24.0), on an embedded platform.
I am using the FreeRADIUS server for AAA authentication.
I am able to get the PMK values correctly at the supplicant side, however while decrypting the MPPE key at the gateway side I see that the values are incorrect specially in the API(radius_client_sec_prot_ms_mppe_recv_key_pmk_decrypt)
Below are my setup details:
FreeRADIUS server setup on Ubuntu(3.2.1)
openssl :1.1.1f
Ubuntu version : 20.04.04LTS
System information
Client side setup
Platform : Micro controller based platform
OS : FreeRTOS
Compiler gcc-arm-none-eabi-8-2019-q3-update
Sample example
MPPE KEY in clear at RADIUS Server
Fri Dec 30 23:50:13 2022 : Debug: (209) MS-MPPE-Recv-Key = 0x2f6c3e7e748eb49a598c208af3ef520454f5aa6873bc72f7f32be1053914a566
Fri Dec 30 23:50:13 2022 : Debug: (209) MS-MPPE-Send-Key = 0xa04539819a272e94782af1818b05878bb0e420d08a51accd6c3cb75baaecbd75
PMK Key values at Supplicant(which is same as MPPE-RECV-KEY)
PMK Key values at Supplicant(which is same as MPPE-RECV-KEY)
2022-12-30 23:50:07.313 #1 0000000000000000 <log> 0:28:21.215 [debug] [ tlsp] {Wi-SUN Ev}: >>>> PRINT THE KEY PMK >>>>
2022-12-30 23:50:07.313 #1 0000000000000000 <log> 0:28:21.224 [debug] [ tlsp] {Wi-SUN Ev}: EAP-TLS key material 2f:6c:3e:7e:74:8e:b4:9a:59:8c:20:8a:f3:ef:52:04:54:f5:aa:68:73:bc:72:f7:f3:2b:e1:05:39:14:a5:66
which is same as the value that we see at the RADIUS Server.
Decrypted key Value at Authenticator(using the API radius_client_sec_prot_ms_mppe_recv_key_pmk_decrypt)
2022-12-30 23:51:34.763 #1 0000000000000000 <log> 3:09:17.919 [debug] [ hmac] {Wi-SUN Ev}: hmac_md key a9:69:02:e9:3a:1d:cd:05:31:b3:77:cd:d6:d7:c2:c7:2d:52:4b:0a:5b:b1:aa:81:20:67:dd:b8:1c:04:ef:63
Mbed TLS version (number or commit id): 2.24.0
Operating system and version:
Configuration (if not default, please attach mbedtls_config.h):
Compiler and options (if you used a pre-built binary, please indicate how you obtained it):
Additional environment information:
Expected behavior
The key should be decrypted with the correct value.
Actual behavior
The key is not getting the correct value.
Steps to reproduce
Additional information
Kindly let me know what is missing here ?
Thanks in advance.
With regards,
Ajay.
Brentwood, UK.
With mbedTLS set up as a streaming server (e.g. https), can it deal
with two attempts to connect that arrive in quick succession, so two
handshakes are occurring simultaneously?
David
I have a working Client code in which I use MbedTLS functions to send HTTPS GET request to my server. For sending data to the server, I use mbedtls_ssl_write(). But this call is blocking.
My goal is to make this function call (mbedtls_ssl_write()) non-blocking. What is the correct way to do it ?
I read the documentation and concluded that:
1. I have to set the bio callbacks using the mbedtls_ssl_set_bio() function where I have to pass the callback functions as parameters in this function call.
2. I have to set the SSL context as non-blocking using the mbedtls_net_set_nonblock() function call
3. I have used the default bio callbacks, named mbedtls_net_send and mbedtls_net_recv, which are defined in net_sockets.c
My question is:
After setting the default bio callbacks (mbedtls_net_send and mbedtls_net_recv) and setting the SSL context as non-blocking (mbedtls_net_set_nonblock) which function should I use for non-blocking write/read. Will it be mbedtls_ssl_write() and mbedtls_ssl_read() ? And will the call back functions (which are set using mbedtls_ssl_set_bio) be called when read/write completes?
Please help me with advice on how to implement non-blocking write/read using MbedTLS functions.
Thanks and Regards,
Sritam Paltasingh.
Hi,
PSA driver interface specification talks about "add_entropy" entry point.
Snippet pasted below.
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/proposed/psa-driv…
*A driver can declare an entropy source by providing a "get_entropy" entry
point. This entry point has the following prototype for a driver with the
prefix "acme":*
*psa_status_t acme_get_entropy(uint32_t flags,
size_t *estimate_bits,
uint8_t *output,
size_t output_size);*
However, in the current implementation of MbedTLS 3.x I don't see
this implemented . With the psa_crypto-init() what I observe is that if the
platform enables MBEDTLS_ENTROPY_HARDWARE_ALT then using "
mbedtls_hardware_poll(),
the entropy source can be provided.
Can you please confirm if this observation is correct and also let us know
if the <driver>_get_entropy() is planned to be implemented in near future ?
Regards,
Ruchika
This event has been canceled.
MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Monday Jan 2, 2023 ⋅ 3am – 3:50am
Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
Guests
Don Harbin - creator
nnac123(a)gmail.com
santosdanillo(a)gmail.com
schoenle.thomas(a)googlemail.com
kris.kwiatkowski(a)pqshield.com
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
~~//~~
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event. To
stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of
their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP.
Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Dear sir/madam
I have following queries regarding implementation of MBED CRYPTO Libraries :
1) How crypto libraries files could be used on baremetal with no entropy
source(cross compilation )?
2) How asymmetric cryptographic operations like RSA , RNG , EC ,DSA etc ,
could be implemented on baremetal without entropy , seed provisions ?
3) If i want to use some custom PRNG and entropy , then how the respective
contexts structures could be filled ?
Thanks & Regards,
*Prashant Tripathi*
Hi Mbed TLS users,
We are pleased to announce the release of Mbed TLS versions 3.3.0 and 2.28.2.
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and bring other minor changes. Full details are available in the release notes (https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-3.3.0 and https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/mbedtls-2.28.2 ).
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
The releases are available from
https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls/releases
Dave Rodgman
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list -- mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-announce-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org