parent
05cde32d01
commit
3ffe4b3386
@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ |
||||
% POA Network threshold crypto audit |
||||
% Jean-Philippe Aumasson |
||||
% 20181024 |
||||
|
||||
# Introduction |
||||
|
||||
We reviewed <https://github.com/poanetwork/threshold_crypto> for security defects (branch master, e28b77d). |
||||
|
||||
This implements the pairing-based threshold signature and encryption schemes, based on the [Boneh-Lynn-Shacham](https://www.iacr.org/archive/asiacrypt2001/22480516.pdf) pairing-based signature scheme, on its extension to threshold signatures using Lagrange interpolation by [Boldyreva](https://eprint.iacr.org/2002/118.pdf), and on the composition with an IND-CCA encryption construction as described by [Baek and Zheng](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.119.1717&rep=rep1&type=pdf) (a.k.a. "signcryption"). |
||||
|
||||
The elliptic-curve arithmetic and pairings are over the BLS12 elliptic curve, and is based on Sean Bowe's `pairing` crate (also used in Zcash), which we have audited in the past months. |
||||
|
||||
We reviewed the source code by manual inspection, and used modified versions of the unit tests in order to perform more testing of edge cases, malformed inputs, and so on. |
||||
We have checked the following points (non-exhaustive list): |
||||
|
||||
* Primitives (curve, hash) and their implementation |
||||
* Use of rand? OsRng used for secret stuff |
||||
* Exploitable panics |
||||
* Unsafe unwraps |
||||
* Memory zeroizing completeness |
||||
* Equivalent keys using signed/unsigned indices |
||||
* Leakage from ciphertext data structure |
||||
* Incomplete/insufficient verification |
||||
* Threshold enforcement and edge cases |
||||
* Dependencies security/versions |
||||
|
||||
We did not find any exploitable security issue in the logic nor implementation of the threshold schemes, but only report potential improvements in the section Observations below. |
||||
|
||||
The audit work took approximately 6h30, including the review of |
||||
literature related to the threshold cryptosystems implemented, and the |
||||
review of patches following our initial observations. |
||||
|
||||
# Observations |
||||
|
||||
## Impossible error? |
||||
|
||||
``` |
||||
impl IntoFr for u64 { |
||||
fn into_fr(self) -> Fr { |
||||
Fr::from_repr(self.into()).expect("modulus is greater than u64::MAX") |
||||
} |
||||
} |
||||
``` |
||||
Can this really fail, since the trait is only defined for `u64` types, which cant be greater than `u64::MAX`? |
||||
(We noticed this when trying to overflow the value / crash decryption.) |
||||
|
||||
### Status |
||||
|
||||
Failure is indeed impossible, but the `expect()` is meant as an |
||||
clarification for the reader that the Result obtained must be less than |
||||
`u64::MAX`. |
||||
|
||||
## Set a threshold threshold? |
||||
|
||||
Threshold value in SecretKeySet::random() is unlimited (but to `usize`), high values can panic, |
||||
e.g. with `2^64-1` we get `thread 'tests::test_threshold_sig' panicked at 'capacity overflow', liballoc/raw_vec.rs:754:5`. |
||||
|
||||
Another panic occurs if calling `SecretKeySet::random(0, &mut rng);`. |
||||
|
||||
### Status |
||||
|
||||
The overflow was fixed, and we reviewed the patch. |
||||
|
||||
## Xored buffers length check |
||||
|
||||
The xor function does not check that input slices have an equal length, which is ok in the current context, since this function is always called with same-length slices. |
||||
|
||||
``` |
||||
fn xor_vec(x: &[u8], y: &[u8]) -> Vec<u8> { |
||||
x.iter().zip(y).map(|(a, b)| a ^ b).collect() |
||||
} |
||||
``` |
||||
|
||||
### Status |
||||
|
||||
This was addressed by integrating this operation in the hashing logic. |
||||
|
||||
## Outdated dependencies |
||||
|
||||
* byteorder (1.2.3 instead of 1.2.6) |
||||
* log (0.4.1 instead of 0.4.5) |
||||
* rand (0.4.2 instead of 0.5.5); however note that 0.5 and above have made API changes breaking backward compatibility |
||||
* rand_derive (0.3.1 instead of 0.5.0) |
||||
* serde (1.0.55 instead of 1.0.79) |
||||
* serde_derive (1.0.55 instead of 1.0.79) |
||||
|
||||
### Status |
||||
|
||||
The versions had not been updated at the time of our second review, but |
||||
should be before the next release. |
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in new issue