[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cryptoapi Blowfish implementation and IV argument issues
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Olaf Titz wrote:
> It _is_ a bug, because the Blowfish algorithm is clearly specified and
> the cryptoapi implementation breaks this spec.
ack - as it concern the crypto API, of which one would expect to
implement the algorithm correctly; especially wrt network protocols
> I've also long suspected that the cryptoapi IDEA implementation has
> the same problem. Has anyone ever verified this? (Sorry, I don't have
> a big-endian box to test.)
>
> > be resolved... i.e. by fixing the current, and providing a
> > compat-blowfish cipher...
>
> Which is the only sane way out of this mess, yes.
> While we're at it, can anyone tell me why the IV argument in the
> cryptoapi functions since 2.4.16 is specified as u32[] ? I see the
> imminent danger that the same implementation mistake as cited above
> will be made again, as someone will write code which reads and writes
> the IV in 32-bit chunks. For the same reason as for the ciphers
> themselves, this does not work. Can this possibly be changed to a byte
> pointer?
sure; planned anyway...
and btw, the old API used the context struct to store the IV, but this
lead to non-reentrancy issues when the IV was changed frequently; I've
been told CIPE's cvs version still uses the context for IV;
shall I re-introduce context-IV's for compatibilities sake, and change the
API a bit as well? (i.e. 2 calls, encrypt () and encrypt_iv ())
regards,
--
Herbert Valerio Riedel / Phone: (EUROPE) +43-1-58801-18840
Email: hvr@hvrlab.org / Finger hvr@gnu.org for GnuPG Public Key
GnuPG Key Fingerprint: 7BB9 2D6C D485 CE64 4748 5F65 4981 E064 883F 4142
-
Linux-crypto: cryptography in and on the Linux system
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/