This event has been changed.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
When: Every 4 weeks from 9:30am to 10:30am on Monday 17 times Mountain
Standard Time - Phoenix
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* nnac123(a)gmail.com
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NWdhMWpuZ2ZpdWNp…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi everyone,
The PSA Crypto Driver Interface describes entry points for collecting
entropy from drivers:
|psa_status_t acme_get_entropy(uint32_t flags, size_t
*estimate_bits, uint8_t *output, size_t output_size);|
Currently, MbedTLS does not have any kind of support for those PSA
driver entry points. I'm currently looking at trying to add initial
support for those in the code. The idea is to write a very simple
solution to get the ball rolling and that can be extended and improved
later on. Is there interest for a patch to add this?
There are different ways to integrate it into the current MbedTLS code.
Do you already have plans or ideas on how it should be done? After
multiple attempts locally, I've came up with an approach that can work
well. Like for other PSA Crypto drivers, the entropy entry points would
be listed in the generated "psa_crypto_driver_wrappers.c" file. Those
entry points can then be used by a sub-function of
mbedtls_entropy_gather(). What do you think of that approach?
Best regards,
François.
Hi Max,
Unfortunately, it would not be possible for us to re-license the project to GPLv2 - this would require agreement with all copyright holders of code contributed to Mbed TLS 2.17, which isn't feasible.
For this reason I'm afraid we cannot offer an exception for individual projects.
Regards
Dave Rodgman
On 13/01/2022, 10:28, "Maximilian Fillinger via mbed-tls" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
Hello!
OpenVPN can be compiled with OpenSSL or mbedtls. However, OpenVPN is licensed under GPLv2 only. If I understand correctly, that means it is not legal to distribute binaries of OpenVPN that are linked with mbedtls 2.17 or later.
At Fox Crypto, we produce a hardened version of OpenVPN, called OpenVPN-NL, for use by the Dutch government, which uses mbedtls. (The latest release is rather old and still uses 2.16.)
Is there anyone I could ask about making an exception for linking OpenVPN with mbedtls?
Regards,
Max Fillinger
--
mbed-tls mailing list -- mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mbed-tls-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
You have been invited to the following event.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum - Asia
Time: Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Nov 8, 2021 10:00 AM
Dec 6, 2021 10:00 AM
Jan 3, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 31, 2022 10:00 AM
Feb 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Mar 28, 2022 10:00 AM
Apr 25, 2022 10:00 AM
May 23, 2022 10:00 AM
Jun 20, 2022 10:00 AM
Jul 18, 2022 10:00 AM
Aug 15, 2022 10:00 AM
Sep 12, 2022 10:00 AM
Oct 10, 2022 10:00 AM
Nov 7, 2022 10:00 AM
Dec 5, 2022 10:00 AM
Jan 2, 2023 10:00 AM
Jan 30, 2023 10:00 AM
Feb 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Mar 27, 2023 10:00 AM
Apr 24, 2023 10:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJ0kc-GsqDktHNGa8CWl6wJ7je6CKD-5zgh8/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
When: Every 4 weeks from 3am to 3:50am on Monday 17 times Mountain Standard
Time - Phoenix
Joining info: Join with Google Meet
https://meet.google.com/fwh-srqw-rgf?hs=224
Join by phone
(US) +1 304-397-0314 (PIN: 358348986)
More phone numbers: https://tel.meet/fwh-srqw-rgf?pin=6539665554630&hs=0
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=MmU4dm1iNzJ0dmV1…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
You have been invited to the following event.
Title: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: MBed TLS Technical Forum
Time: Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM London
Every 4 weeks on Mon, 20 occurrence(s)
Oct 25, 2021 04:30 PM
Nov 22, 2021 04:30 PM
Dec 20, 2021 04:30 PM
Jan 17, 2022 04:30 PM
Feb 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Mar 14, 2022 04:30 PM
Apr 11, 2022 04:30 PM
May 9, 2022 04:30 PM
Jun 6, 2022 04:30 PM
Jul 4, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 1, 2022 04:30 PM
Aug 29, 2022 04:30 PM
Sep 26, 2022 04:30 PM
Oct 24, 2022 04:30 PM
Nov 21, 2022 04:30 PM
Dec 19, 2022 04:30 PM
Jan 16, 2023 04:30 PM
Feb 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Mar 13, 2023 04:30 PM
Apr 10, 2023 04:30 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your
calendar system.
Weekly:
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJEkceuurT4sGdaksikbUn6FARB9Kuk3ac2o/ics…
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/95962635632?pwd=STFkQVltejAzRDJ6NmoxZjhmZC9RUT…
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Passcode: 018366
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,95962635632# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,95962635632# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 959 6263 5632
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aewUpnQu5y
When: Every 4 weeks from 9:30am to 10:30am on Monday 17 times Mountain
Standard Time - Phoenix
Joining info: Join with Google Meet
https://meet.google.com/ofy-jxph-boy?hs=224
Join by phone
(US) +1 704-705-7047 (PIN: 141276187)
More phone numbers: https://tel.meet/ofy-jxph-boy?pin=3695767709143&hs=0
Calendar: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Who:
* Don Harbin - creator
* psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Event details:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NWdhMWpuZ2ZpdWNp…
Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org because you are an attendee of this
event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event.
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification
settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to
the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless
of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn more at
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding
Hi All,
FYI, per Shebu, I'm adding both mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org to the MBed TLS Tech Forum invites.
Please look for this in your inbox and accept it if you would like the
series added to your calendar.
- Note that this is a monthly meeting but you will see two invites, one
that is for Asia timezones and one for Europe/US. Just delete the series
that isn't timezone friendly for you.
- FYI, recall that this and other tech forums can be found in the meeting
calendar on the TF website <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you see a meeting in that calendar, click on the entry and an option
comes up saying "copy to my calendar." It will import that single instance
into your personal calendar from there if you wish. I wasn't able to test
this feature with outlook, but it worked fine for google calendar.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hello!
OpenVPN can be compiled with OpenSSL or mbedtls. However, OpenVPN is licensed under GPLv2 only. If I understand correctly, that means it is not legal to distribute binaries of OpenVPN that are linked with mbedtls 2.17 or later.
At Fox Crypto, we produce a hardened version of OpenVPN, called OpenVPN-NL, for use by the Dutch government, which uses mbedtls. (The latest release is rather old and still uses 2.16.)
Is there anyone I could ask about making an exception for linking OpenVPN with mbedtls?
Regards,
Max Fillinger
Hello,
I want to test/analyze the performance increase of using tinycrypt for ECC operations instead of the standard MbedTLS ECC functions. Could you please help me with a few answers regarding this?
I am aware that tinycrypt is already integrated in the baremetal branch. Do you happen to know what is the performance increase of using this tinycrypt uECC implementation instead of the standard one on arm cortex m4 microcontrollers?
I would like to port the tinycrypt uECC changes from baremetal branch to a Mbed TLS 2.25.0 version used in Matter repo (from where Mbed TLS repo is refered), more exactly this commit: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/tree/1c54b5410fd48d6bcada97e30cac417c5c7…
What do you think is the best approach? I thought of forking Mbed TLS, creating a separate branch with that commit and adding there the tinycrypt changes from baremetal branch. However, I'm not sure how to proceed next since the Matter repo refers the MbedTLS repo. Is this approach ok?
Thank you!
Hi,
I have completed my job on these topics so I would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list, can you help me?
Thank you!
Michele
[cid:image001.png@01D7FCCB.D711FD40]
Hillrom is now a part of Baxter
Michele Innocenti
Sr Principal Engineer, SW Eng
Gambro Dasco S.p.A.
Via Modenese 66 / 41036 Medolla, Modena, Italy
T. +39 0535.50578
michele_innocenti(a)baxter.com<mailto:michele_innocenti@baxter.com>
Dear all,
mbedtls 3.x is incompatible with mbedtls 2.x so the transition of all
the packages using mbedtls will take a long time. However, from my
understanding, it is not possible to install both versions side by
side as a lot of headers are common to both versions and installed in
include/mbedtls.
This fact is raising concern on buildroot side, see:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20211228153345.4087026…
Can you confirm that a side-by-side installation of both mbedtls versions
is not possible and/or can you share some inputs on this topic?
Best Regards,
Fabrice
Hi,
We are pleased to announce the release of Mbed TLS 2.16.12, 2.28.0 and 3.1.0.
These releases of Mbed TLS address several security issues, provide bug fixes, and new features, including initial support for TLS 1.3 in Mbed TLS 3.1.0.
Full details are available in the release notes (https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v3.1.0, https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.28.0, https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.16.12).
Mbed TLS 2.16.12 will be the last release in the 2.16 LTS; it will no longer be supported.
Mbed TLS 2.28 is the new long-term support release, and will be supported with bug-fixes and security fixes until end of 2024.
We recommend all users to consider whether they are impacted, and to upgrade appropriately.
Dave Rodgman
Dear MBedTLS-Team,
we are currently evaluating MBedTLS for use in our Product. We develop
an implant for blood pressure patients, and our implant and its charger
need to communicate securely. We already have an AES encrypted
communication running, but so far we just store the password in every
device, and we would like to switch to RSA to exchange an AES key. It
would also be important for us to be able to validate an x509
certificate on the implant. However, due to energy constraints, our
internal flash memory on the implant is extremely small, and we would
like to not parse the certificate on the implant, but rather send only
the key and the signature directly, and then "validate by hand" on the
implant. If I understand the procedure correctly, that would only
involve taking a hash of the pubkey, decrypting the signature with a
stored CA-public key, and compare them, correct? Would that be possible?
Besides normal support during our implementation phase, we would be
interested in being informed whenever a vulnerability is found in
MBedTLS and a fast update. Do you offer such a service? If so, what will
it cost?
Kind Rergards,
Felix Knorr
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen neuroloop GmbH
i.A. Felix Knorr
Senior Software Developer
--------------------------------------
neuroloop GmbH
Engesserstr. 4, 79108 Freiburg, Germany
Amtsgericht Freiburg HRB 713935
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Lauk, Dr. Dennis Plachta
The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of the company of the sender of this e-mail. Unauthorized use, disclosure, or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments.
Hi,
I am trying to encrypt data on my rabbitmq communication.
On the rabbitmq server end I am using the openssl and on the client end I cant use openssl but I can use mbedtls.
I am using mbedtls-2.26.0 version in my rabbimq-c client .
The certificate is generated via https://github.com/michaelklishin/tls-gen
The certificate is valid and has no issue because the communication works fine when I use the ssl_client2 and ssl_server2 applications from the mbedtls-2.26.0\programs.
The communication works fine when I use the rabbitmq openssl client and openssl server.
But when I try to use the rabbitmq openssl server and ssl_client2 from mbedtls-2.26.0\programs the connection is reset.
I think it’s a config issue but I am not able to figure out the solution or the rootcause.
I am not sure if I can use mbedtls client with openssl server.
Could you please help me in this.
Below is the log from wireshark. Attached is the log from sslclient2 program.
After the certificate is verified the broker resets the connection
TCP 60271 → 5671 [SYN] Seq=0 Win=65535 Len=0 MSS=65475 WS=256 SACK_PERM=1
TCP 5671 → 60271 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=65535 Len=0 MSS=65475 WS=256 SACK_PERM=1
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=1 Win=2618880 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Client Hello
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=305 Win=2618880 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Server Hello, Certificate, Server Key Exchange, Certificate Request, Server Hello Done
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=305 Ack=1976 Win=2616832 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Certificate
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=945 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Client Key Exchange
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1088 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Certificate Verify
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1173 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Change Cipher Spec
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1179 Win=2618112 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Encrypted Handshake Message
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=1976 Ack=1216 Win=2617856 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Change Cipher Spec, Encrypted Handshake Message
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1216 Ack=2019 Win=2616832 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Application Data
TCP 5671 → 60271 [ACK] Seq=2019 Ack=1245 Win=2617856 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Application Data
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1245 Ack=2048 Win=2616832 Len=0
TLSv1.2 Encrypted Alert
TCP 60271 → 5671 [ACK] Seq=1245 Ack=2071 Win=2616832 Len=0
TCP 5671 → 60271 [RST, ACK] Seq=2071 Ack=1245 Win=0 Len=0
Thanks,
Shailaja
Hi,
On Monday at 10am UK time, we will hold the Mbed TLS Tech Forum. This is an open forum conference call for anyone to participate; please reply here if there are any agenda topics you would like to raise.
Zoom details are in the TF calendar: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/mbed-tls-technical-forum/ or see below
Dave
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
Hi guys,
I have a mbetls based server client application (DTLS) written in Apple Swift language, wrapping the mbedtls C api, running just fine for many years now on iOS, Android, and Linux. We have been compiling the code with Swift 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 in both release and debug mode.
Recently I just recompiled my code with Swift 5.5 in release mode, and my handshakes started failing on the Linux server with cryptic mbedtls_pk_sign() returned -17280 (-0x4380). When I take the same code and recompile in debug mode (-Onone) it works as expected. The same code compiled with Swift+C for iOS and macOS still works in both debug and release mode on both client/server.
If I understand the compilation process correctly, the Swift Package Manager that we use to wrap mbedtls simply uses CMakeLists.txt to compile mbedtls and pick up the right flags.
I am attaching excerpt from the log where the server part of the handshake fails (in release mode) and succeeds (in debug mode).
I am certain this is probably caused by my code and how I wrap C mbedtls sources in Swift, but I can not yet rule out a bug in Swift/C compiler part for Linux which from time to time does have bugs related to code optimization.
Could any good soul who understands the parts of the code below point me in the direction where to look and why would the mbedtls_pk_sign fail this way? What parts of the SSL context does it use? I will deep dive into the code to see whether this can be caused by memory corruption or anything else.
It’s on LTS mbedtls-2.16.11.
Could I run some tests to perhaps verify that mbedtls is compiled and working correctly?
thanks for any help,
Martin
— failing handshake —
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3296 => write server key exchange
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3074 ECDHE curve: secp521r1
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(X)' (521 bits) is:
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 01 d0 5f 4a fa 12 f8 46 75 fb 3e 38 db ba 88 ff
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 73 72 79 78 21 dd 9f ac ac 02 db e7 7e 91 6e 5c
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 06 ed 77 19 42 f1 11 6a f5 75 04 20 d8 51 50 a5
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 8f 5a 3d 8c b3 c0 15 df cc d7 5b e5 eb 04 2e b6
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 2f e7
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(Y)' (518 bits) is:
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 26 c1 52 f0 b6 20 4c aa 53 7c aa 27 12 5f 72 7f
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 11 ea a9 34 9a f5 ef 63 28 76 d8 52 4e 31 a3 13
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 52 a5 c9 52 5f 6b 41 b6 7e 47 0e 2a 68 c5 e5 80
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 14 27 ad aa 96 5b 89 41 55 5b d5 52 61 66 8c 06
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3100 4b
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3163 pick hash algorithm 8 for signing
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 dumping 'parameters hash' (64 bytes)
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0000: 55 c8 d2 5c 83 d8 6b e3 9f 9c b2 f4 e7 f7 4d 26 U..\..k.......M&
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0010: b4 ce c9 df c2 ae 7a 60 cb e8 02 13 d5 6d d8 ec ......z`.....m..
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0020: 48 72 77 9f e2 69 4e f5 b4 1d db 9a 75 2a 5e c7 Hrw..iN.....u*^.
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3201 0030: e1 1b 66 fc a6 ff 37 c6 6d 42 9b b3 cf 63 bb 0e ..f...7.mB...c..
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_srv.c:3274 mbedtls_pk_sign() returned -17280 (-0x4380)
Dec 7 15:54:53 ssl_tls.c:8219 <= handshake
— successful handshake —
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3296 => write server key exchange
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3074 ECDHE curve: secp521r1
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(X)' (519 bits) is:
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 52 5f 4e 78 48 bd be 6a e4 98 21 30 ce 1c ba 08
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 b7 ae 88 d3 ff c9 c4 a5 8c 13 1e 73 5b 1f 08 60
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 7c 51 a7 ec 91 54 d7 52 f3 55 6a 34 92 cf 92 e8
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 c8 39 33 5e d3 46 3d 89 e7 6d 8f 41 d9 e0 67 e6
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 7c
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 value of 'ECDH: Q(Y)' (520 bits) is:
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 87 48 29 20 93 8e f8 9a a9 54 70 26 58 79 9d 67
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 8c ec 0f 06 ae 73 13 40 72 58 fe c1 6e 14 b4 48
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 55 a1 27 74 9d 63 36 aa db 80 29 f8 ab 9c 64 ba
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 f9 0a 19 af 9a 65 6f 02 96 c6 53 4d 49 4f b4 f5
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3100 46
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3163 pick hash algorithm 8 for signing
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 dumping 'parameters hash' (64 bytes)
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0000: e1 65 f4 f0 a6 a3 67 7d 32 55 ed 2a 13 08 71 8a .e....g}2U.*..q.
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0010: 7e 13 f6 30 85 ed c3 c9 10 e8 b2 43 75 bc 6c 24 ~..0.......Cu.l$
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0020: 8f fb d8 90 cb 53 7f 13 53 13 1b f4 eb bd 38 5c .....S..S.....8\
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3201 0030: ec 46 c2 0c a9 93 5b 60 5e 5d 81 f2 b3 b0 b5 a8 .F....[`^]......
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 dumping 'my signature' (256 bytes)
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0000: 7a a7 0f 17 79 33 36 b7 0c 17 84 5b cc ca 1c 0c z...y36....[....
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0010: cb f5 56 80 ea 5d 7f cf ab 86 d5 f9 91 36 0e 68 ..V..].......6.h
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0020: 76 c6 c0 4b 77 bf 28 e7 b8 c0 a7 de ea d8 a0 30 v..Kw.(........0
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0030: 3a b3 4e 24 ea e0 c8 0b e7 ad ba 4d 35 30 c0 39 :.N$.......M50.9
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0040: a8 ff f0 6d 8f 28 db fc 5e c3 fb 21 fe 76 dd 07 ...m.(..^..!.v..
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0050: 1b 2c 58 fe 7b 0a f5 72 49 d9 d1 9a 10 af 29 21 .,X.{..rI.....)!
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0060: 7a d9 01 a4 99 01 de 6e ae fd 76 ce b9 64 84 49 z......n..v..d.I
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0070: 96 97 2d 3a 15 ed 5b de d5 99 9d 1b eb 4c 1a aa ..-:..[......L..
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0080: a8 e6 36 29 bd 67 b0 50 91 6e b8 cb 0a 42 4a 79 ..6).g.P.n...BJy
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 0090: 4a 65 ae 95 d0 bc 5a e1 e7 75 2a f9 ba 51 1c 2c Je....Z..u*..Q.,
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00a0: ff 67 e3 df eb a0 d7 6c d2 cf 71 d2 ea 24 7c 16 .g.....l..q..$|.
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00b0: f8 5b 72 83 56 a9 48 e1 b6 cd d0 bd dd 20 23 d5 .[r.V.H...... #.
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00c0: 80 c4 bd 6e 42 1c 61 b2 e4 41 01 ce c8 85 26 21 ...nB.a..A....&!
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00d0: b4 0a 5e fe 50 0d 6f 45 a8 fe 15 18 87 e3 ae b3 ..^.P.oE........
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00e0: ac 46 c5 c6 bb bc 70 1b 32 b7 15 c5 3d fb 09 1e .F....p.2...=...
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3361 00f0: 8f 69 f7 e7 a8 86 4d 0b 87 ea 4b fe 08 7e 00 0b .i....M...K..~..
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:3289 => write handshake message
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:2917 => ssl_flight_append
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:2953 <= ssl_flight_append
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_tls.c:3425 <= write handshake message
Dec 7 16:13:52 ssl_srv.c:3380 <= write server key exchange
Hi,
Is it possible to run the benchmark of all cyphers natively on a ESP32
board? I have already run them on laptop but my goal is to run them on
esp32, using for example tool like espifd.
Hello
You are receiving this email because you are subscribed to one or more
mailing lists on lists.trustedfirmware.org.
The purpose of this email is to let you know that the software on the
server is being upgraded between Wednesday 29th December and Friday 31st
December. During that time, the server will be unavailable and any email
sent to a list on the server will be queued for later delivery.
After the upgrade has been completed, you will receive a follow-up email
from me to confirm that the upgrade has been completed and to provide you
with instructions on how to set up your account on the new server. With the
new software, you have one account regardless of how many mailing lists you
are subscribed to.
Regards
Philip Colmer
Director, Information Services
Linaro
Hello,
Is it possible to output a mbedtls_x509_crt as PEM or DER? I’ve been combing the API docs but don’t see how I can do this export. I see controls for exporting a newly-built cert, but not one that comes from, e.g., mbedtls_ssl_get_peer_cert().
Thank you!
Cheers,
-Felipe Gasper
https://gist.github.com/FGasper/43758d13e987518009d18ec8951ffcbb
^^ With 3.0.0 this prints:
seeded entropy
mbedtls connected
trust loaded ok
SNI set ok
handshake tried
handshake: X509 - Certificate verification failed, e.g. CRL, CA or signature check failed
… but if I switch to the development branch, it works.
Same trust chain, same code … but the production code fails while the dev one works …
Am I just “holding it wrong”?
Thank you in advance!
-FG
Hi All,
I am new here.
With a colleague, I am working on a product which previously used
PolarSSL but was later changed to MbedTLS which, in the ST ARM 32F417
implementation, is believed to be less buggy.
It is working ok as far as we have got, but we are finding that as
well as needing some 100k more FLASH, it needs nearly 50k of RAM,
which on the 32F417 (128k RAM) would normally be OK but due to other
required functionality it leaves us just 10k.
The architecture we are using for MbedTLS is a 48k (48k was found to
be the smallest that works) static buffer within which TLS runs its
own heap. I am aware that in the most generic case one has to have
enough for one 16k buffer (plus a bit) for HTTPS, but what concerns me
is that there appears to be no way to determine the worst case memory
usage, across various usage scenarios.
It would also be great to reduce this 48k to say 30k.
Some of the protocols we know we don't need (e.g. PPP) but within any
of them there is the question of which cipher suite needs supporting.
What is the minimum cipher suite required to be able to use MbedTLS as
an HTTPS client for use with typical current cloud-based file storage
or data logging APIs such as Dropbox, Google Drive, Loggly etc?
And what is the recommended minimum cipher suite required to implement
an HTTPS server that would be able to negotiate a session with most
current web-browsers?
The goal is to ideally reduce both RAM and code size requirements for
use in an embedded device that needs to work both as a general purpose
server and client, without requiring support for multiple concurrent
sessions.
The other thing is that even the ST port of MbedTLS doesn't appear to
make use of ST CPU hardware features such as AES256, DES, etc, which
the 32F417 has in hardware. This speeds things up hugely but much more
importantly in our case, saves a lot of RAM. For example AES256 can
use about 10k if done in software.
Thank you very much in advance for any input on what can be done.
Peter
Hello,
I am Marco Portoni and I am working on a thesis research for the University
of Study of Milan. It is focused on cryptographic libraries in the IoT
world, and my question is: is it possible to run the benchmark on a ESP32?
I have already runned the benchmark on 2 of my laptops to test and
collected the results, but my ultimate goal is to make the benchmark run
on the ESP. Is it possible to do it? Thanks for every help!
Marco
Hello,
I’m trying to build shared from git on macOS and having no luck. I’m doing:
> mkdir build; cd build
> cmake DUSE_SHARED_MBEDTLS_LIBRARY=On ..
…
> make
…
> ls -la library
total 2944
drwxr-xr-x 10 felipe staff 320 Dec 1 08:49 .
drwxr-xr-x 15 felipe staff 480 Dec 1 08:49 ..
drwxr-xr-x 8 felipe staff 256 Dec 1 08:49 CMakeFiles
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 92755 Dec 1 08:49 Makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 2942 Dec 1 08:49 cmake_install.cmake
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 34055 Dec 1 08:49 error.c
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 916112 Dec 1 08:49 libmbedcrypto.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 315856 Dec 1 08:49 libmbedtls.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 104072 Dec 1 08:49 libmbedx509.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe staff 26265 Dec 1 08:49 version_features.c
Am I just missing something? It seems like I’m following what the README says to do; I also did `export SHARED=1` just in case, but that made no difference.
Thank you in advance!
-FG
Hi Radhika,
We do not plan to extend support for Mbed TLS 2.16 beyond the three year support period.
We do plan to release a 2.x LTS (probably 2.28) alongside the final 2.16 release, so that we always have an LTS available.
Regards
Dave Rodgman
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Radhika Jandhyala via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: Radhika Jandhyala <radhikaj(a)microsoft.com>
Date: Monday, 22 November 2021 at 10:50
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] End of Life of LTS branch 2.16
Hi,
I am a maintainer for https://github.com/openenclave/openenclave. We include mbedtls 2.16 as a submodule in our project.
Reading the article below, it states that 2.16 support will last at least till Dec 2021. Will you continue to support 2.16 in 2022?
https://tls.mbed.org/tech-updates/blog/announcing-lts-branch-mbedtls-2.16
We are specifically interested in CVE fixes being backported to 2.16 and the timeframe where that will continue. Is there an updated timeline for this?
We do plan to upgrade to 3.0 in early 2022, but we anticipate that will take some effort due to breaking changes.
Thank you very much!
Radhika
Hi,
Mbed TLS 2.16 LTS is approaching the end of its support period – it was originally announced that it would be maintained for at least 3 years up until the end of 2021 – and currently there is no other LTS branch.
To ensure that there is no period of time without a supported LTS branch, we plan to release 2.28 LTS in the near future (which will have the usual 3 year support period). We will continue supporting 2.16 LTS until this is available. The expectation is that as 2.28 will be API-compatible with 2.16, users of 2.16 LTS will be able to upgrade to 2.28 very easily.
Progress towards 2.28 LTS can be followed here: https://github.com/orgs/ARMmbed/projects/18#column-15836286
Dave Rodgman
Hi,
I am a maintainer for https://github.com/openenclave/openenclave. We include mbedtls 2.16 as a submodule in our project.
Reading the article below, it states that 2.16 support will last at least till Dec 2021. Will you continue to support 2.16 in 2022?
https://tls.mbed.org/tech-updates/blog/announcing-lts-branch-mbedtls-2.16
We are specifically interested in CVE fixes being backported to 2.16 and the timeframe where that will continue. Is there an updated timeline for this?
We do plan to upgrade to 3.0 in early 2022, but we anticipate that will take some effort due to breaking changes.
Thank you very much!
Radhika
Hi,
We'd like to announce a change we intend to make: starting with Mbed TLS 3.1, it will no longer be possible to build with TLS, X.509, or PK without support for PSA Crypto.
Details: currently, use of PSA Crypto APIs from the TLS, X.509 and PK layers is controlled by the option MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO. When this option is disabled (which is the default), it's possible to build without MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C. Starting with 3.1, we intend to start making TLS, X.509 and PK use PSA Crypto unconditionally, so MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C will be automatically enabled in the build as soon as TLS, X.509 or PK is enabled.
Impact: for users who already build with PSA Crypto enabled (the default), no impact. For users who currently disable MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_C in their configuration, starting with 3.1 there will be no functional changes, but the size of the built library will increase due to the additional features enabled. The increase depends on the configuration, application, platform, and toolchain, but the order of magnitude currently ranges from about 9 KB for a minimal TLS configuration with LTO (link-time optimisation) to about 30 KB for a full configuration without link-time garbage collection (though size-constrained devices are very unlikely to use such a configuration); we aim to reduce this overhead in the future.
Rationale: maintaining two versions of every cryptographic operation in upper layers (one PSA, one non-PSA) imposes a significant burden on new developments. By removing that burden, we hope to progress faster on things that are more important in the long run, including better integration of PSA Crypto in TLS and X.509, and future code size optimisation of PSA Crypto. We realise the impact on users who were excluding PSA Crypto is significant. We're going to release Mbed TLS 2.28 in the coming months, which is not affected by this change and will receive bug fixes and security fixes for at least 3 years; we hope it provides an acceptable fall-back solution to affected users.
In the long run, PSA Crypto will become the only Crypto API we offer; we want to make its footprint as small as possible considering its feature set and we hope this change will enable us to make faster progress towards that goal.
Best regards,
Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard for the Mbed TLS team.
Hi,
While working on updating mbedtls to v3.0, I saw that the internal fields in MBEDTLS have been made private. ( ref- here<https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/3.0-migration-guid…>). It says there and I quote
"As a last resort, you can access the field foo of a structure bar by writing bar.MBEDTLS_PRIVATE(foo). Note that you do so at your own risk, since such code is likely to break in a future minor version of Mbed TLS.”
I just wanted to know if there is any alternative solution to this, rather than using `MBEDTLS_PRIVATE` everywhere. I know the next release of mbedtls probably plans to fix this with appropriate solution. But we wanted to push out our feature branch As early as possible.
I saw in the PR<https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/37753> in zephyr RTOS about updating to mbedtls-3.0. They have just added this line<https://github.com/ceolin/zephyr/blob/5bf3128a9703561e578651218f5bcdafb96f8…>
#if !defined(MBEDTLS_ALLOW_PRIVATE_ACCESS) #define MBEDTLS_ALLOW_PRIVATE_ACCESS
# endif
Is this an alternative solution to using `MBEDTLS_PRIVATE` for accessing a private field. If yes, can somebody please point me to respective document as this would greatly reduce our code-changes.
I understand there is some discussion going on in mbedtls about this change, and appropriate getter-setter functions shall be provided. But we wanted to push out out feature branch for early testing.
Thanks and Regards,
Aditya
Hi,
On Monday 8th we will have the next Mbed TLS Tech Forum. Please reply to the list if you have any agenda topics to raise.
As a starter for the agenda, we will likely discuss: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/pull/5067 Proposal for driver dispatch code gen
Dave Rodgman
Zoom details below. The call will be recorded and made available on the TF website : https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/99948462765?pwd=SGlHYlF1Z2owUDNFWWppaGlSRDh5UT…
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Passcode: 196117
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,99948462765# US (Tacoma)
+13462487799,,99948462765# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 999 4846 2765
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/anpWWkRdt
I need to use mbedtls (bundled with Nordic SDK, and unsure of version) to
do some cloud-based functionality (AWS cloud, using OpenAM with a CA chain
containing 4 certs). According to something I read, I need to use a pkcs7
container? If so, it seems that mbedtls does not support pkcs7? I did
hand-copy some code from a PR, but as I was looking through the pkcs7.c, it
seems that it still only supports the CA Root. Is this true?
Is there anyone that can give me a hand in solving what I am attempting to
do?
Thank you
/Loren Rogers
Dear Sir,/Madam
We need to convert the files - root.cer,client1.cer
and client1-key.pem to jks using the tool keystore explorer. For that, the
password for the files are needed.Please provide passwords.We need to
establish connection between java client and mbedtls c server.Kindly
provide help.
Regards
Lekshmi G
Dear Madam/Sir,
We are working on a project which requires IEC 62351 standards.
For that we had developed a TLS server in C language and we had the
requirement of developing a TLS client in Java language. We had used
the *mbedTLS
library for server* and *OpenMUC libraries for client*. But we are getting
exception while certificate exchange phase and all. We had attached the
listed exceptions and errors. Kindly provide necessary support for the
same. Also please confirm whether we can develop above specified
architecture, ie TLS based server in C language and client in Java. If
available please share some sample programs also. Please reply ASAP.
We have debugged the code and the following are the messages we have got in
mbedtls java server and OPENMUC java tls client . During certificate
exchange from client to server (MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE case in
server), the function returns a nonzero value and the alert shows in
server is 49 (ie, MBEDTLS_SSL_ALERT_MSG_ACCESS_DENIED). *Please check Fig
1 and Fig 2* for the messages displayed during connection
establishment.Kindly help us to solve the issues.
[image: image.png]
Fig 1- case:MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE fails
[image: image.png]
Fig 2-OPENMUC java client error when connecting to mbedtlsserver
ReplyForward
<https://drive.google.com/u/0/settings/storage?hl=en&utm_medium=web&utm_sour…>
<https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/>
<https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/>
<https://www.google.com/gmail/about/policy/>
Hi,
I would like to announce the Mbed TLS Tech Forum, a regular engineering call to discuss topics of interest to the Mbed TLS community.
The call is currently planned to take place every two weeks, alternating between US-friendly and China-friendly times (16:30 and 10:00 UK time), starting on the 25th October at 16:30 BST.
Please reply to the list if you have any agenda topics to raise. As a starting point, we will cover:
Format – check if times & cadence are suitable
TLS 1.3 – high-level update on progress & direction
PSA Cryptoprocessor Driver Interface – code generation for driver dispatch as per https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/pull/5067
Zoom details below. The call will be recorded and made available on the TF website: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/
Dave Rodgman
Mbed TLS tech lead
--
Dave Rodgman is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://armltd.zoom.us/j/93259847316?pwd=N0d4Z0o5RXRLKzZFaE1sd044bm14dz09&f…
Meeting ID: 932 5984 7316
Passcode: 991642 One tap mobile
+442034815240,,93259847316#,,,,*991642# United Kingdom
Dial by your location
+44 203 481 5240 United Kingdom
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
+1 646 518 9805 US (New York)
+91 116 480 2722 India
+91 224 879 8012 India
+91 406 480 2722 India
+91 806 480 2722 India
+852 5803 3730 Hong Kong SAR
+46 8 4468 2488 Sweden
+972 3 978 6688 Israel
+353 1 536 9320 Ireland
+36 1 408 8456 Hungary
+33 1 7037 2246 France
+358 3 4109 2129 Finland
+45 32 70 12 06 Denmark
+1 438 809 7799 Canada
+65 3158 7288 Singapore
+27 87 550 3946 South Africa
+32 1579 5132 Belgium
+48 22 307 3488 Poland
+386 1600 3102 Slovenia
+60 3 3099 2229 Malaysia
+886 (2) 7741 7473 Taiwan
Meeting ID: 932 5984 7316
Passcode: 991642 Find your local number: https://armltd.zoom.us/u/adTMafG7oQ
Join by SIP
93259847316(a)zoomcrc.com
Join by H.323
162.255.37.11 (US West)
162.255.36.11 (US East)
115.114.131.7 (India Mumbai)
115.114.115.7 (India Hyderabad)
213.19.144.110 (Amsterdam Netherlands)
213.244.140.110 (Germany)
103.122.166.55 (Australia Sydney)
103.122.167.55 (Australia Melbourne)
209.9.211.110 (Hong Kong SAR)
149.137.40.110 (Singapore)
64.211.144.160 (Brazil)
69.174.57.160 (Canada Toronto)
65.39.152.160 (Canada Vancouver)
207.226.132.110 (Japan Tokyo)
149.137.24.110 (Japan Osaka)
Meeting ID: 932 5984 7316
Passcode: 991642
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list
Mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls-announce
I'm hoping to make the switch from libressl to MbedTLS. I'm working
on a Linux from scratch style project. Curl works fine with MbedTLS
and most of the utilities I work with use libcurl. I'm also using
libtomcrypt for some of its hash and cryptographic functionality. The
only place I'm having a problem making the switch at present is when I
follow the LFS logic to make certificates (make-ca). There's a
openssl/libressl command in the script that looks like the following:
openssl x509 -hash -noout -in "$1"
Is there a way to replace this functionality with a command or
procedure or function from another program so that libressl or openssl
isn't needed to perform this step?
Thanks.
Hello,
I'm using mbedTLS on baremetal lwip+stm32f4 system as a Server. TLS working
successfully with the TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 but when I
receive the Client Hello message than my receive proccess function in
ethernetif_input: err = netif->input(p, netif); takes 300ms time. This
function normaly takes 1ms. I need to reduce this time. How Can I do that ?
This is my config file: https://paste.ofcode.org/Bdt4FapskKY7M5ggm3uViJ
Best Regards.
--
Embeded System Engineer
Dear Madam/Sir
We need to establish connection with security between
MMS client application in java(OPENMUC java client) and MMS server
(tls_server_example
in mbedtls).The java client application uses keystore.jks and
truststore.jks (*jks format* ) instead of certificate in *cer *format.Is it
possible to establish connection between OPENMUC java mms client and
libiec61850 1.5 with mbedtls-2.16.6* ?* . We have added the *root.cer
details *(certificate in the sample mbedtls server program ) to
* truststore.jks* in client (openmuc java) and *client1.cer details*
(client1 certificate in the sample mbedtls server program ) *to
keystore.jks* .When trying to establish connection server hello messages
are completed ,but showing the following error:
*MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_NO_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE.*
* Please help...*
*Regards*
*Lekshmi G*
Hi Roman,
My understanding is that you would like to add features to the Crypto
service API, but the features which you would like to add are not
cryptographic in nature.
Have you considered creating your own service for those features, instead of
modifying the Crypto service? Or is there anything makes this not a viable
option?
If you are thinking about adding hardware acceleration for some Crypto
features, that's indeed covered in Shebu's link.
Greetings,
Fabian Schmidt
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Shebu
Varghese Kuriakose via TF-M
Sent: Dienstag, 12. Oktober 2021 11:46
To: David Hu <David.Hu(a)arm.com>; Roman.Mazurak(a)infineon.com;
tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto
Service.
Caution: EXT Email
Hi Roman,
I also might not have understood the question completely.
As you mention crypto HAL API, here is the specification which defines a
standardized mechanism for PSA Crypto implementations to interface with
Secure elements and crypto accelerators -
https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/proposed/psa-driver
-interface.md
<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
m%2FARMmbed%2Fmbedtls%2Fblob%2Fdevelopment%2Fdocs%2Fproposed%2Fpsa-driver-in
terface.md&data=04%7C01%7Cfabian.schmidt%40nxp.com%7C17489158b6384ef5caa308d
98d654ead%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637696288543072051%7C
Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLC
JXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=uKX4sUH37jNx1%2BvACuN8tBQl05OaXPPnMT9FqMwbhdU%3D&r
eserved=0>
Also adding mbed-tls mailing list as the thread is crypto related..
Regards,
Shebu
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> > On Behalf Of David Hu via
TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:18 AM
To: Roman.Mazurak(a)infineon.com <mailto:Roman.Mazurak@infineon.com> ;
tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com <mailto:nd@arm.com> >
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi Roman,
Are you asking about adding platform specific HAL API to implement PSA
Crypto API function?
Please correct me if I misunderstand your question.
Best regards,
Hu Ziji
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> > On Behalf Of Roman Mazurak
via TF-M
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 9:45 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi all,
We would like to add a number of platform specific functions to Crypto
Service API. Is it ok if such functions will not be related to cryptographic
service, but such approach allows us to optimize platform design? Is there
any initiative to create a Crypto Service HAL API to extend Crypto with
custom functions?
Best regards,
Roman.
Hi Roman,
I also might not have understood the question completely.
As you mention crypto HAL API, here is the specification which defines a standardized mechanism for PSA Crypto implementations to interface with Secure elements and crypto accelerators - https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/docs/proposed/psa-drive…
Also adding mbed-tls mailing list as the thread is crypto related..
Regards,
Shebu
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of David Hu via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:18 AM
To: Roman.Mazurak(a)infineon.com; tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi Roman,
Are you asking about adding platform specific HAL API to implement PSA Crypto API function?
Please correct me if I misunderstand your question.
Best regards,
Hu Ziji
From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Roman Mazurak via TF-M
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 9:45 PM
To: tf-m(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-M] Adding platform specific functions to Crypto Service.
Hi all,
We would like to add a number of platform specific functions to Crypto Service API. Is it ok if such functions will not be related to cryptographic service, but such approach allows us to optimize platform design? Is there any initiative to create a Crypto Service HAL API to extend Crypto with custom functions?
Best regards,
Roman.
Hello,
I am using this example for the source of the my main purpose :
https://github.com/straight-coding/LPC407x-NoOS-LWIP-MBEDTLS-HTTPD-KEIL/blo…
This example using https but I'm trying to use this example on Modbus
Server.
This is init function for the server tcp connections:
BOOL
xMBTCPPortInit( USHORT usTCPPort )
{
struct altcp_pcb *pxPCBListenNew, *pxPCBListenOld;
BOOL bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
USHORT usPort;
extern struct altcp_tls_config* getTlsConfig(void);
tls_config = getTlsConfig();
mbedtls_ssl_conf_dbg(tls_config, my_debug, NULL);
mbedtls_debug_set_threshold(5);
if( usTCPPort == 0 )
{
usPort = MB_TCP_DEFAULT_PORT;
}
else
{
usPort = ( USHORT ) usTCPPort;
}
if( ( pxPCBListenNew = pxPCBListenOld = altcp_tls_new(
tls_config,IPADDR_TYPE_ANY) ) == NULL )
{
/* Can't create TCP socket. */
bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
}
else
if( altcp_bind( pxPCBListenNew, IP_ANY_TYPE, ( u16_t ) usPort ) !=
ERR_OK )
{
/* Bind failed - Maybe illegal port value or in use. */
( void )altcp_close( pxPCBListenOld );
bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
}
else if( ( pxPCBListenNew = altcp_listen( pxPCBListenNew ) ) == NULL )
{
( void )altcp_close( pxPCBListenOld );
bOkay = (BOOL)FALSE;
}
else
{
// altcp_tls_new(pxPCBListenNew, IP_GET_TYPE(ip_addr))*/;
/* Register callback function for new clients. */
altcp_accept( pxPCBListenNew, prvxMBTCPPortAccept );
/* Everything okay. Set global variable. */
pxPCBListen = pxPCBListenNew;
#ifdef MB_TCP_DEBUG
vMBPortLog( MB_LOG_DEBUG, "MBTCP-ACCEPT", "Protocol stack
ready.\r\n" );
#endif
SerialPrint("MBTCTP-ACCEPT");
}
bOkay = (BOOL)TRUE;
return bOkay;
}
struct altcp_tls_config* getTlsConfig(void)
{
struct altcp_tls_config* conf;
size_t privkey_len = strlen(privkey) + 1;
size_t privkey_pass_len = strlen(privkey_pass) + 1;
size_t cert_len = strlen(cert) + 1;
conf = altcp_tls_create_config_server_privkey_cert((u8_t*)privkey,
privkey_len, (u8_t*)privkey_pass, privkey_pass_len, (u8_t*)cert, cert_len);
return conf;
}
And I am using basic python tls client example to show successful mbedtls
handshake.
This is my client.py codes:
import time
from socket import create_connection
from ssl import SSLContext, PROTOCOL_TLS_CLIENT
import ssl
hostname='example.org'
ip = '192.168.1.2'
port = 502
context = SSLContext(PROTOCOL_TLS_CLIENT)
context.options |= ssl.OP_NO_SSLv3
context.options |= ssl.OP_NO_TLSv1
context.options |= ssl.OP_NO_TLSv1_1
context.load_verify_locations('cert.pem')
with create_connection((ip, port)) as client:
with context.wrap_socket(client, server_hostname=hostname) as tls:
print(f'Using {tls.version()}\n')
tls.sendall(b'Hello world')
data = tls.recv(1024)
print(f'Server says: {data}')
When I try to start communication I get below outputs on wireshark:
[image: image.png]
When the server send hello message I've this error on the line:
[image: image.png]
When I checked the low_level_output functions I get sending data bytes 150
byte but Ipv4 length shows us 576 byte, opt.h file set as default but if I
changed TCP_MSS as a 250 byte so I can send 136 byte and Ipv4 packet
lenght shows me 136. But does not make sense. I couldnt do successful
handshaking.
My mbedtls debug outputs in this link
https://paste.ofcode.org/PP3zFmrLcKqPdRMT3LzETz How cna I solve this
problem ? What is the reason for the lenght problem ?
Best Regards.
--
Embeded System Engineer
Hello,
I am very sorry about last email by mistakes. I have some questions about multiplication on ecp curves.
I add an ecp curve parameter in ecp_curve.c form SM2 algorithm standard, and the parameter is as follow:
Then I followed the loading method of secp256r1 to load, but I don’t know how to perform fast calculations, so I commented NIST_MODP( p256 ).
#if defined(MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1_ENABLED)
caseMBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1:
NIST_MODP( p256 );
return( LOAD_GROUP( secp256r1 ) );
#endif
#if defined(MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SM256_ENABLED)
caseMBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SM256:
//NIST_MODP( p256 );
return( LOAD_GROUP_A( sm256 ) );
#endif
Then I call the functional interface mbedtls_ecp_mul to perform the multiplication operation, but the heap memory keeps increasing .
voidtest()
{
intret;
mbedtls_mpiUd;
mbedtls_ecp_groupgrp;
mbedtls_ecp_pointT_Q;
mbedtls_mpi_init(&Ud);
mbedtls_ecp_group_init( &grp );
mbedtls_ecp_point_init( &T_Q );
ret=mbedtls_mpi_read_binary(&Ud, arrUd, sizeof(arr_U_d));
// ret = mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&grp,MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SECP256R1);
ret=mbedtls_ecp_group_load(&grp,MBEDTLS_ECP_DP_SM256);
ret=mbedtls_ecp_mul(&grp, &T_Q, &Ud, &(grp.G), NULL, NULL) ;
printf("%x\n", -ret);
mbedtls_mpi_free(&Ud);
mbedtls_ecp_group_free( &grp );
mbedtls_ecp_point_free( &T_Q );
}
intmain()
{
for(inti=0; i<10; i++)
test();
return0;
}
The heap memory is mesaured by massif( valgring tools),
Can someone tell me what this is because of and how to fix this problem ?
Best Regards.
Shudong Zhang
The |mbedtls| client project I'm working on, is to also support the
cipher suites: |TLS-ECDHE-ECDSA-WITH-AES-256-CCM| &
|TLS-ECDHE-ECDSA-WITH-AES-128-CCM|. I have specified them like:
|const int ciphersuites[] = {
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256,
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA384,
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CCM,
MBEDTLS_TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CCM, 0 };
mbedtls_ssl_conf_ciphersuites(&ctxt->conf,ciphersuites); |
and while I can see the GCM ciphers in the |Client Hello|, I cannot see
the |CCM| ciphers.
In |mbedtls/include/mbedtls/config.h|, the following are enabled:
|#define MBEDTLS_CCM_ALT #define MBEDTLS_CCM_C #define
MBEDTLS_ECDH_GEN_PUBLIC_ALT #define MBEDTLS_ECDH_COMPUTE_SHARED_ALT
#define MBEDTLS_ECDSA_SIGN_ALT |
What is still missing?
While CCM is not listed under The following ciphers may be included
<https://tls.mbed.org/module-level-design-cipher>, the ciphers i would
like to add definitely show up under Supported SSL / TLS ciphersuites
<https://tls.mbed.org/supported-ssl-ciphersuites>,
Can someone help out?
Hello,
*RAM USAGE:*
We are using mbedTLS 2.16 for TLS communication and found that it is
consuming more RAM compared to other Cybersecurity library (Mocana ) which
we were using earlier. I want to reduce the RAM usage, if there are any
settings which i can apply to reduce the RAM usage
Presently MbedTLS is using almost 38KB of RAM per TLS connection, I have
small memory in my device (STM32F437), I want to reduce this RAM
consumption to 30KB per TLS connection.
*SLOWNESS:*
we have found that after 4 TLS connections on STM32F437 controller,
communication becomes very slow, we measured the CPU utilization at this
point of time, and it's only 40% ustilized, we are not getting any clue
why it becomes so slow. When we compare with Mocana cyber security library
we were able to run 6 TLS connections with good speed.
Please help us with the above 2 topics.
--
Thanks and Regards,
Sunil Jain
Hi mbedTLS team,
Our teams are in the process of reviewing available TLS library options. Is
there any information that we can find with respect to the mbedTLS stance
on TLS 1.3 support? I.E is there a timeline available supporting TLS 1.3?
Alternatively is there documentation available that outlines the expected
deltas between TLS 1.2 and 1.3 that can help compare the value gained by
using TLS 1.3 instead of 1.2?
Regards,
Alex Sukhov
Geotab
Embedded System Developer, Team Lead
Toll-free
Visit
+1 (877) 431-8221
www.geotab.com
Twitter <https://twitter.com/geotab> | Facebook
<https://www.facebook.com/Geotab> | YouTube
<https://www.youtube.com/user/MyGeotab> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/geotab/>
When we are using the version *mbedtls-2.16.6* with *libiec61850-1.5*, the
TLS connection is established successfully. But when we use the *2.7.19*,
the connection fails(we renamed *mbedtls 2.7.19* as *mbedtls 2.16* and put
in the folder third_party\mbedtls ).
We had occurred following error during the execution of client- server
example programs tls_server_example and tls_client_example using 2.7.19
version.
During handshaking process till CASE "
MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_CHANGE_CIPHER_SPEC " it worked as expected.
But In CASE "MBEDTLS_SSL_CLIENT_FINISHED" the return value should be zero.
But we got in function mbedtls_ssl_safer_memcmp
mac_peer==41155316
mac_expect==41155356
diff=255 (this value has to be 0 for connection establishment)
But we are getting 255 constantly in all runnings.
Kindly help us to resolve the issue. If this issue is due to the non
supporting of mbedtls version ?.Thanks in advance.
Please let us know the *supporting versions of mbedtls *for
*libiec61850-1.5 *.
Hello,
Mbed TLS supports building and running unit tests in one of two modes:
“hosted” or “on target”. The on-target mode relies on Greentea, the Mbed
OS test framework. The on-target mode is unmaintained (there's no CI for
it and the Mbed TLS maintainers hardly ever even try to build it these
days) and we're considering retiring it in Mbed TLS 2.28.
If you do use Mbed TLS's on-target unit testing, either by building
target_test.function or by plugging your own file instead of
target_test.function or host_test.function, please let us know and weigh
in on https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/issues/4912
<https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/issues/4912> .
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hello,
I'm using an older version of mbedtls (polarssl-1.3.9).
I have a plain text private key generated from OpenSSL like the following.
I'm trying to load this private key into the *rsa_context *using the
following code (sorry, for the following code, I just don't know what to
copy),
Private key with padding (I have added padding manualy to make it divisible
by 16 )
==================================================
// Total private key size is 4013
# define KEY_BUFFER_SIZE 4017
unsigned char private_decrypt[KEY_BUFFER_SIZE];
*printf("private key with padding --> \n %s \n", private_decrypt); -->
shows the following*
private key with padding -->
RSA Private-Key: (2048 bit, 2 primes)
modulus:
00:cc:40:c3:c6:e7:29:ae:f5:94:d8:3b:3f:a4:33:
c2:6d:29:86:63:db:b7:8c:d4:07:f7:b3:db:96:83:
f7:55:dd:6a:7b:04:49:53:3d:52:30:5f:af:0b:c2:
b1:f0:48:a4:66:0a:b7:aa:29:b1:d0:91:4f:9c:1c:
cf:df:5c:10:04:85:f9:bd:7b:93:ed:a6:77:80:12:
34:64:19:1a:18:b5:4e:94:7c:39:ce:99:38:50:e9:
82:71:f6:0f:3e:b8:af:11:3c:f4:05:69:72:8e:96:
f6:81:ac:46:29:eb:88:88:c5:54:2f:89:1b:b9:32:
da:76:23:a2:00:76:a5:8e:50:d3:ba:39:35:f9:4d:
95:63:ff:6a:3c:c8:a8:53:aa:78:d8:81:c8:bd:af:
cf:6c:de:33:aa:c9:d4:80:2c:1f:ef:92:90:8a:c4:
88:e6:9a:e5:ad:2d:08:60:89:1a:77:fc:bf:68:64:
6f:c0:a7:fa:33:6d:ff:d2:e6:a4:7f:ad:87:be:0c:
cb:9d:18:44:57:fe:db:86:7f:0b:c5:f7:9a:29:4b:
61:62:48:91:01:f7:e7:5e:64:4d:20:ec:ac:3c:07:
59:d6:19:f5:8c:01:9f:d5:6e:16:a8:8e:f9:2d:f6:
f8:73:25:0a:b5:d8:62:2a:f8:ba:d5:dc:ff:6e:77:
0d:35
publicExponent: 65537 (0x10001)
privateExponent:
4a:17:50:2d:2d:9b:5c:40:ef:3e:44:b7:c0:3b:9a:
52:78:d6:ac:10:7e:93:92:32:55:b3:23:7b:84:e1:
4a:7f:67:e9:b9:d3:53:63:92:15:c4:0f:be:47:60:
be:95:cb:34:cc:bc:74:f8:6c:ed:08:59:05:7b:1a:
18:9e:cf:9c:a4:70:c4:40:38:97:e3:63:c3:cc:56:
be:dc:b0:2f:b8:4d:09:e5:ca:1e:5c:4c:26:65:9e:
10:f2:bd:f2:f5:91:63:c2:65:8e:35:02:fe:20:5a:
c9:0d:11:e2:90:f2:d5:12:27:88:9a:c6:b8:b6:6e:
b2:9e:18:5c:ec:ac:ff:63:42:94:b3:b5:ff:69:75:
f5:e9:41:77:8b:ee:1d:fa:47:78:9a:9c:1f:84:8b:
85:f9:29:a5:27:e4:1f:04:34:4e:ce:c2:28:18:38:
72:63:5c:44:88:4f:e2:ec:bc:c4:3e:af:d8:bb:a9:
0f:c9:30:0f:bf:bc:1d:8a:fc:d9:cf:27:f5:16:38:
34:07:3d:bf:a5:45:70:df:c5:8f:ee:79:3e:69:6e:
e4:0c:74:76:f7:8a:2c:11:34:53:60:27:c3:73:55:
62:d5:06:cb:35:a4:3d:d6:79:3f:50:d4:81:7c:0f:
03:c5:15:b2:4a:eb:84:f1:16:07:ec:16:02:e4:5c:
1d
prime1:
00:e5:40:6a:4c:8d:d3:8d:8d:e6:df:e7:1d:c4:8f:
4d:b4:b7:71:51:b7:c4:8a:19:fe:fd:3e:4b:a9:0b:
d0:22:64:e0:76:f4:8b:88:d6:30:4b:f6:41:ae:20:
c5:cc:79:ec:05:d0:6b:0e:64:16:c5:b5:e3:74:b6:
a8:ac:39:74:1d:8a:09:b8:68:64:a4:c1:74:fa:f6:
cd:1b:24:d6:86:1e:40:51:dc:09:78:76:8b:16:3e:
f1:ea:a9:9b:25:69:4a:c4:3e:ba:63:62:6c:06:40:
83:8d:af:69:89:bd:ad:07:f4:97:39:7c:25:59:80:
07:59:4e:74:a0:4b:2a:05:67
prime2:
00:e4:15:a8:6a:e6:30:95:d6:36:44:a7:57:ac:99:
d5:4d:d9:58:59:05:49:89:b8:42:cb:0e:e8:9d:12:
fc:a4:76:e7:07:11:08:97:05:7d:0a:34:21:23:03:
c9:4b:97:5c:6f:fc:7e:28:8a:c5:b1:44:12:61:03:
60:5e:f9:d2:51:cf:53:0f:7a:2f:a5:96:5a:f5:33:
f7:6f:6e:92:14:cc:54:b1:48:ad:da:f7:37:c7:ca:
6f:a2:6a:00:de:73:6c:67:59:78:af:e9:ce:fb:02:
95:f8:0d:82:38:02:79:e5:a4:3b:61:16:b7:70:b1:
70:c8:9a:e8:81:c7:cb:fb:03
exponent1:
57:04:78:54:ce:90:ba:6e:5e:70:26:9d:d9:fa:3b:
18:99:78:dd:f7:cf:16:4c:7f:c9:48:58:17:b6:70:
2e:5d:f4:05:b3:15:33:bf:79:5d:9b:ff:9a:44:be:
4f:bb:07:a7:bd:50:a5:89:c0:4b:13:9b:5e:b5:e6:
98:58:c6:86:5f:db:08:b0:37:63:82:3b:10:f7:95:
2a:f4:74:a9:3b:da:56:38:1b:30:2a:6e:e8:e6:c3:
94:bb:04:34:d3:1e:9a:16:e5:50:cc:0f:0c:e0:78:
0e:d3:c2:4f:92:3b:97:85:73:d1:52:1a:2b:3a:b9:
8f:60:84:4c:43:bb:93:89
exponent2:
00:d7:ea:08:bc:e9:9c:24:bb:dc:33:b1:96:b5:b6:
0a:ce:df:69:5b:1c:3e:39:39:4d:41:9c:a3:67:ce:
89:8b:c7:63:7c:b5:0b:44:ab:d5:6a:cb:5e:73:1f:
2a:77:7c:99:ed:09:41:04:70:1a:25:6d:23:58:e3:
31:5f:b7:6e:fa:33:21:96:0d:3c:fd:ac:0f:fe:ff:
6a:c4:fa:0f:1f:d1:2e:7b:85:29:cf:97:28:1e:e1:
ec:3b:fb:cd:46:c8:4d:5e:a8:bc:2f:0b:4e:fd:1f:
bd:88:4c:81:71:34:26:e0:d5:4f:c0:e1:18:56:7e:
23:1e:44:46:c6:54:b5:2c:b1
coefficient:
2e:45:e5:0a:bc:66:bc:6e:9d:0d:ce:02:d6:30:62:
44:f6:38:d0:a7:2a:25:c4:42:76:cc:59:38:af:35:
cb:6e:a7:5e:3c:71:97:6a:7b:c4:69:25:2e:c4:07:
20:2c:86:5c:a1:e8:6e:d8:e6:b7:9a:21:28:1e:8a:
b1:4b:c5:ab:4e:35:e0:83:b5:30:56:53:d7:50:2f:
69:a2:6c:7b:00:d8:15:17:bb:79:72:33:30:11:47:
06:c5:58:16:63:e3:f5:ac:71:3d:ce:64:67:0e:6a:
e0:cd:c2:e6:ad:30:f9:3e:7e:52:01:cf:fc:fc:66:
10:44:1a:4b:1b:08:7a:8d
000 <----- padding
============================================
Remove padding and get the actual private key using the the following code,
=============================================================================
size_t lenght=strlen(private_decrypt); // length =4016
int N= lenght-4013; // 4013 is the original length of the private key, N
is the length of padding
private_decrypt[lenght-N]='\0'; // So, now *private_decrypt *contains the
actual key
=============================================================================
Then I use the following code to split each key and load into rsa_context,
=====================================================================
char *strings[]={ "modulus:", "publicExponent:", "privateExponent:",
"prime1:", "prime2:", "exponent1:", "exponent2:", "coefficient:"};
char* in = &private_decrypt;
char *token;
const char s[2] = " ";
char *token_2;
int k=0, size;
do {
if(k<8){
token = strstr(in,strings[k]);
size= strlen(token);
if (token){
*token = '\0';
}
switch (k) {
case 1:
strcat(in,"\0");
printf("k=%d:\n %s\n",k,in);
mpi_read_string(&rsaContext->N, 16, in);
break;
case 2:
token_2 = strtok_r(in, s, &in);
strcat(token_2,"\0");
printf("k=%d:\n %s\n",k,token_2);
mpi_read_string(&rsaContext->E, 16, token_2);
break;
case 3:
break;
case 4:
break;
case 5:
break;
case 6:
break;
case 7:
break;
}
//printf("k=%d \n%s\n",k,in);
in = token+strlen(strings[k]);
k=k+1;
}
else{
token= "NULL";
break;
}
}while(token!=NULL);
// Check Public key
if(rsa_check_pubkey(rsaContext)!=0){
printf("Reading public key error\n");
exit(0);
}
=====================================================================
Upon doing all this, when check the if the public key is load correctly or
not, I'm getting *"Reading public key error". *Any help, what I'm doing
wrong?
Regards,
Shariful Alam
Hello,
I found that, /programs/pkeyrsa_genkey.c creates a plaintext rsa private
key. Is there any way I can generate the keys in the same format from a
.pem format?
Regards,
Shariful Alam