Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 10:31 AM Dec 2013

Worried OpenSSL uses NSA-tainted crypto? This BUG has got your back

As fears grow that US and UK spies have deliberately hamstrung key components in today's encryption systems, users of OpenSSL can certainly relax about one thing.

It has been revealed that the cryptography toolkit – used by reams of software from web browsers for HTTPS to SSH for secure terminals – is not using the discredited random number generator Dual EC DRBG.

And that's due to a bug that's now firmly a WONTFIX.

A coding flaw uncovered in the library prevents "all use" of the dual elliptic curve (Dual EC) deterministic random bit generator (DRBG) algorithm, a cryptographically weak algorithm championed by none other than the NSA.

No other DRBGs used by OpenSSL are affected, we're told.

"The nature of the bug shows that no one has been using the OpenSSL Dual EC DRBG," Steve Marquess of the OpenSSL Software Foundation wrote yesterday in a mailing list post. He credited the find to Stephen Checkoway and Matt Green of the Johns Hopkins University Information Security Institute.

The bug in fips_drbg_ec.c can be fixed with a one-line change so that the Dual EC DRBG state is updated and its output used. It is a rare example of a software screwup that has beneficial side-effects.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/20/openssl_crypto_bug_beneficial_sorta/
11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Worried OpenSSL uses NSA-tainted crypto? This BUG has got your back (Original Post) FarCenter Dec 2013 OP
Is It Truly Safe To Trust Anyone Anymore? cantbeserious Dec 2013 #1
Only those you know well who have more incentive to help than harm you. FarCenter Dec 2013 #3
Is it truly safe to trust no one? randome Dec 2013 #6
Safest To Presume That Everything Is Compromised - Otherwise Reality Will Bite Very Hard cantbeserious Dec 2013 #7
Sort of like Santa Claus FarCenter Dec 2013 #9
More Like Dropping Out Of The System - If One Refuses To Participate - There Is Nothing To Monitor cantbeserious Dec 2013 #10
I did not understand half of that. dixiegrrrrl Dec 2013 #2
Deterministic Random Bit Generators FarCenter Dec 2013 #5
Ahhh..bless you. dixiegrrrrl Dec 2013 #11
Well alrightie then... 99Forever Dec 2013 #4
It kind of shows you where the NSA is in some people's minds. gulliver Dec 2013 #8
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
6. Is it truly safe to trust no one?
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 11:00 AM
Dec 2013

The idea that the NSA has secret 'back doors' into everything is always couched in techno-babble to make it sound more believable for the gullible.

Because technology is so damned complicated! Peons like us can't be bothered to know what's right or wrong!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
9. Sort of like Santa Claus
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 11:20 AM
Dec 2013

He sees you when you're sleeping
He knows when you're awake
He knows if you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake

cantbeserious

(13,039 posts)
10. More Like Dropping Out Of The System - If One Refuses To Participate - There Is Nothing To Monitor
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 11:22 AM
Dec 2013

eom

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
2. I did not understand half of that.
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 10:44 AM
Dec 2013

are DRBGs something from Dr. who?
or what?

Man, way behind the learning curve here.

 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
5. Deterministic Random Bit Generators
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 10:56 AM
Dec 2013

If you want to generate a secret to use for communicating with a confidant, you have to generate something that an adversary cannot guess, i.e. something like the heads and tails of a coin flip.

This can be done by taking a source of randomness that is available to the computer, e.g. the interval in microseconds between keystrokes while typing, and then using that data as input to an algorithm that transforms the numbers into a string of bits that are the secret.

NSA caused the particular DRBG to generate bit strings that could be guessed in a number of tries that could be computed with the computers available to NSA. Therefore they would be able to guess the secret and undo the encryption between you and your confidant.

However, their efforts were for naught in this particular widely-used implementation of SSL, since a bug in the code caused the NSA-designed DRBG to never be used. Other, presumably secure, DRBGs would be used by the code instead.

PS - SSL is the Secure Sockets Layer, a communications protocol layer between the Transmission Control Protocol and the Hyper Text Transfer Protocol. Your browser should show a little lock icon or similar signal when SSL is being used. It is the "S" in "HTTPS".

gulliver

(13,180 posts)
8. It kind of shows you where the NSA is in some people's minds.
Sat Dec 21, 2013, 11:11 AM
Dec 2013

It is the "Anti-Privacy," their greatest fear realized. The signs, portents, and prophecies were all correct just like they knew all along. Snowden is a Messiah.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Worried OpenSSL uses NSA-...