DOCSLIB.ORG

Botan Reference Guide Release 2.18.1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Botan Reference Guide Release 2.18.1 Botan Reference Guide Release 2.18.1 Jack Lloyd Daniel Neus René Korthaus Juraj Somorovsky Tobias Niemann 2021-05-09 CONTENTS 1 Getting Started 1 1.1 Examples.................................................1 1.2 Books and other references.......................................1 2 Project Goals 3 2.1 Non-Goals................................................4 3 Support Information 5 3.1 Supported Platforms...........................................5 3.2 Branch Support Status..........................................6 3.3 Getting Help...............................................6 4 Building The Library 7 4.1 Configuring the Build..........................................7 4.2 Cross Compiling.............................................8 4.3 On Unix.................................................9 4.4 On macOS................................................9 4.5 On Windows...............................................9 4.6 For iOS using XCode.......................................... 10 4.7 For Android............................................... 11 4.8 Emscripten (WebAssembly)....................................... 11 4.9 Supporting Older Distros......................................... 11 4.10 Other Build-Related Tasks........................................ 12 4.11 Building Applications.......................................... 14 4.12 Language Wrappers........................................... 15 4.13 Minimized Builds............................................ 15 4.14 Configure Script Options......................................... 15 5 API Reference 27 5.1 Versioning................................................ 27 5.2 Memory container............................................ 28 5.3 Random Number Generators....................................... 29 5.4 Hash Functions and Checksums..................................... 33 5.5 Block Ciphers.............................................. 39 5.6 Stream Ciphers.............................................. 45 5.7 Message Authentication Codes (MAC)................................. 48 5.8 Cipher Modes.............................................. 52 5.9 Public Key Cryptography........................................ 57 5.10 X.509 Certificates and CRLs....................................... 71 5.11 Transport Layer Security (TLS)..................................... 83 i 5.12 Credentials Manager........................................... 112 5.13 BigInt................................................... 114 5.14 Key Derivation Functions........................................ 117 5.15 Password Based Key Derivation..................................... 119 5.16 AES Key Wrapping........................................... 122 5.17 Password Hashing............................................ 123 5.18 Cryptobox................................................ 126 5.19 Secure Remote Password......................................... 126 5.20 PSK Database.............................................. 127 5.21 Pipe/Filter Message Processing..................................... 128 5.22 Format Preserving Encryption...................................... 138 5.23 Threshold Secret Sharing........................................ 143 5.24 Elliptic Curve Operations........................................ 144 5.25 Lossless Data Compression....................................... 147 5.26 PKCS#11................................................. 148 5.27 Trusted Platform Module (TPM)..................................... 172 5.28 One Time Passwords........................................... 174 5.29 Roughtime................................................ 175 5.30 FFI (C Binding)............................................. 175 5.31 Environment Variables.......................................... 189 5.32 Python Binding.............................................. 190 6 Command Line Interface 199 6.1 Outline.................................................. 199 6.2 Hash Function.............................................. 199 6.3 Password Hash.............................................. 199 6.4 HMAC.................................................. 200 6.5 Encryption................................................ 200 6.6 Public Key Cryptography........................................ 200 6.7 X.509................................................... 201 6.8 TLS Server/Client............................................ 202 6.9 Number Theory............................................. 202 6.10 PSK Database.............................................. 203 6.11 Secret Sharing.............................................. 203 6.12 Data Encoding/Decoding......................................... 203 6.13 Miscellaneous Commands........................................ 204 7 Deprecated Features 205 7.1 TLS Protocol Deprecations....................................... 205 7.2 Deprecated Functionality......................................... 206 7.3 Deprecated Headers........................................... 206 7.4 Other API deprecations......................................... 207 7.5 Deprecated Build Targets........................................ 207 8 Development Roadmap 209 8.1 Near Term Plans............................................. 209 8.2 Botan 3.x................................................. 209 9 Credits 211 10 ABI Stability 215 11 Notes for Distributors 217 11.1 Recommended Options......................................... 217 11.2 Set Path to the System CA bundle.................................... 217 ii 11.3 Set Distribution Info........................................... 217 11.4 Minimize Distribution Patches...................................... 218 12 Security Advisories 219 12.1 2020................................................... 219 12.2 2018................................................... 220 12.3 2017................................................... 220 12.4 2016................................................... 221 12.5 2015................................................... 222 12.6 2014................................................... 224 13 Side Channels 225 13.1 Modular Exponentiation......................................... 225 13.2 Barrett Reduction............................................. 225 13.3 RSA................................................... 225 13.4 Decryption of PKCS #1 v1.5 Ciphertexts................................ 226 13.5 Verification of PKCS #1 v1.5 Signatures................................ 226 13.6 OAEP................................................... 227 13.7 ECC point decoding........................................... 227 13.8 ECC scalar multiply........................................... 227 13.9 ECDH.................................................. 228 13.10 ECDSA.................................................. 228 13.11 x25519.................................................. 228 13.12 TLS CBC ciphersuites.......................................... 228 13.13 CBC mode padding........................................... 228 13.14 AES.................................................... 229 13.15 GCM................................................... 229 13.16 OCB................................................... 229 13.17 Poly1305................................................. 229 13.18 DES/3DES................................................ 229 13.19 Twofish.................................................. 230 13.20 ChaCha20, Serpent, Threefish, . ..................................... 230 13.21 IDEA................................................... 230 13.22 Hash Functions.............................................. 230 13.23 Memory comparisons.......................................... 230 13.24 Memory zeroizing............................................ 230 13.25 Memory allocation............................................ 231 13.26 Automated Analysis........................................... 231 13.27 References................................................ 231 14 Developer Reference 233 14.1 Notes for New Contributors....................................... 233 14.2 Understanding configure.py....................................... 237 14.3 Test Framework............................................. 245 14.4 Continuous Integration and Automated Testing............................. 249 14.5 Fuzzing The Library........................................... 250 14.6 Release Process and Checklist...................................... 251 14.7 Todo List................................................. 254 14.8 OS Features............................................... 258 14.9 Private OID Assignments........................................ 260 14.10 Reading List............................................... 261 14.11 Mistakes Were Made........................................... 262 15 Release Notes: 0.7.0 to 1.11.34 265 15.1 Version 1.10.17, 2017-10-02....................................... 265 iii 15.2 Version 1.10.16, 2017-04-04....................................... 265 15.3 Version 1.10.15, 2017-01-12....................................... 265 15.4 Version 1.11.34, 2016-11-28....................................... 266 15.5 Version 1.10.14, 2016-11-28....................................... 268 15.6 Version 1.11.33, 2016-10-26....................................... 268 15.7 Version 1.11.32, 2016-09-28....................................... 269 15.8 Version 1.11.31, 2016-08-30....................................... 270 15.9 Version 1.11.30, 2016-06-19....................................... 272 15.10 Version 1.10.13,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GPU-Based Password Cracking on the Security of Password Hashing Schemes Regarding Advances in Graphics Processing Units
    Radboud University Nijmegen Faculty of Science Kerckhoffs Institute Master of Science Thesis GPU-based Password Cracking On the Security of Password Hashing Schemes regarding Advances in Graphics Processing Units by Martijn Sprengers [email protected] Supervisors: Dr. L. Batina (Radboud University Nijmegen) Ir. S. Hegt (KPMG IT Advisory) Ir. P. Ceelen (KPMG IT Advisory) Thesis number: 646 Final Version Abstract Since users rely on passwords to authenticate themselves to computer systems, ad- versaries attempt to recover those passwords. To prevent such a recovery, various password hashing schemes can be used to store passwords securely. However, recent advances in the graphics processing unit (GPU) hardware challenge the way we have to look at secure password storage. GPU's have proven to be suitable for crypto- graphic operations and provide a significant speedup in performance compared to traditional central processing units (CPU's). This research focuses on the security requirements and properties of prevalent pass- word hashing schemes. Moreover, we present a proof of concept that launches an exhaustive search attack on the MD5-crypt password hashing scheme using modern GPU's. We show that it is possible to achieve a performance of 880 000 hashes per second, using different optimization techniques. Therefore our implementation, executed on a typical GPU, is more than 30 times faster than equally priced CPU hardware. With this performance increase, `complex' passwords with a length of 8 characters are now becoming feasible to crack. In addition, we show that between 50% and 80% of the passwords in a leaked database could be recovered within 2 months of computation time on one Nvidia GeForce 295 GTX.
    [Show full text]
  • Unix Protection
    View access control as a matrix Protection Ali Mashtizadeh Stanford University Subjects (processes/users) access objects (e.g., files) • Each cell of matrix has allowed permissions • 1 / 39 2 / 39 Specifying policy Two ways to slice the matrix Manually filling out matrix would be tedious • Use tools such as groups or role-based access control: • Along columns: • - Kernel stores list of who can access object along with object - Most systems you’ve used probably do this dir 1 - Examples: Unix file permissions, Access Control Lists (ACLs) Along rows: • dir 2 - Capability systems do this - More on these later. dir 3 3 / 39 4 / 39 Outline Example: Unix protection Each process has a User ID & one or more group IDs • System stores with each file: • 1 Unix protection - User who owns the file and group file is in - Permissions for user, any one in file group, and other Shown by output of ls -l command: 2 Unix security holes • user group other owner group - rw- rw- r-- dm cs140 ... index.html 3 Capability-based protection - Eachz}|{ groupz}|{ z}|{ of threez}|{ lettersz }| { specifies a subset of read, write, and execute permissions - User permissions apply to processes with same user ID - Else, group permissions apply to processes in same group - Else, other permissions apply 5 / 39 6 / 39 Unix continued Non-file permissions in Unix Directories have permission bits, too • Many devices show up in file system • - Need write permission on a directory to create or delete a file - E.g., /dev/tty1 permissions just like for files Special user root (UID 0) has all
    [Show full text]
  • A Practical UNIX Capability System
    A Practical UNIX Capability System Adam Langley <[email protected]> 22nd June 2005 ii Abstract This report seeks to document the development of a capability security system based on a Linux kernel and to follow through the implications of such a system. After defining terms, several other capability systems are discussed and found to be excellent, but to have too high a barrier to entry. This motivates the development of the above system. The capability system decomposes traditionally monolithic applications into a number of communicating actors, each of which is a separate process. Actors may only communicate using the capabilities given to them and so the impact of a vulnerability in a given actor can be reasoned about. This design pattern is demonstrated to be advantageous in terms of security, comprehensibility and mod- ularity and with an acceptable performance penality. From this, following through a few of the further avenues which present themselves is the two hours traffic of our stage. Acknowledgments I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Kelly, for all the time he has put into cajoling and persuading me that the rest of the world might have a trick or two worth learning. Also, I’d like to thank Bryce Wilcox-O’Hearn for introducing me to capabilities many years ago. Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Terms 3 2.1 POSIX ‘Capabilities’ . 3 2.2 Password Capabilities . 4 3 Motivations 7 3.1 Ambient Authority . 7 3.2 Confused Deputy . 8 3.3 Pervasive Testing . 8 3.4 Clear Auditing of Vulnerabilities . 9 3.5 Easy Configurability .
    [Show full text]
  • Security Evaluation of Stream Cipher Enocoro-128V2
    Security Evaluation of Stream Cipher Enocoro-128v2 Hell, Martin; Johansson, Thomas 2010 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Hell, M., & Johansson, T. (2010). Security Evaluation of Stream Cipher Enocoro-128v2. CRYPTREC Technical Report. Total number of authors: 2 General rights Unless other specific re-use rights are stated the following general rights apply: Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Read more about Creative commons licenses: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. LUND UNIVERSITY PO Box 117 221 00 Lund +46 46-222 00 00 Security Evaluation of Stream Cipher Enocoro-128v2 Martin Hell and Thomas Johansson Abstract. This report presents a security evaluation of the Enocoro- 128v2 stream cipher. Enocoro-128v2 was proposed in 2010 and is a mem- ber of the Enocoro family of stream ciphers. This evaluation examines several different attacks applied to the Enocoro-128v2 design. No attack better than exhaustive key search has been found.
    [Show full text]
  • Argon and Argon2
    Argon and Argon2 Designers: Alex Biryukov, Daniel Dinu, and Dmitry Khovratovich University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] https://www.cryptolux.org/index.php/Password https://github.com/khovratovich/Argon https://github.com/khovratovich/Argon2 Version 1.1 of Argon Version 1.0 of Argon2 31th January, 2015 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Argon 5 2.1 Specification . 5 2.1.1 Input . 5 2.1.2 SubGroups . 6 2.1.3 ShuffleSlices . 7 2.2 Recommended parameters . 8 2.3 Security claims . 8 2.4 Features . 9 2.4.1 Main features . 9 2.4.2 Server relief . 10 2.4.3 Client-independent update . 10 2.4.4 Possible future extensions . 10 2.5 Security analysis . 10 2.5.1 Avalanche properties . 10 2.5.2 Invariants . 11 2.5.3 Collision and preimage attacks . 11 2.5.4 Tradeoff attacks . 11 2.6 Design rationale . 14 2.6.1 SubGroups . 14 2.6.2 ShuffleSlices . 16 2.6.3 Permutation ...................................... 16 2.6.4 No weakness,F no patents . 16 2.7 Tweaks . 17 2.8 Efficiency analysis . 17 2.8.1 Modern x86/x64 architecture . 17 2.8.2 Older CPU . 17 2.8.3 Other architectures . 17 3 Argon2 19 3.1 Specification . 19 3.1.1 Inputs . 19 3.1.2 Operation . 20 3.1.3 Indexing . 20 3.1.4 Compression function G ................................. 21 3.2 Features . 22 3.2.1 Available features . 22 3.2.2 Server relief . 23 3.2.3 Client-independent update .
    [Show full text]
  • PHC: Status Quo
    PHC: status quo JP Aumasson @veorq / http://aumasson.jp academic background principal cryptographer at Kudelski Security, .ch applied crypto research and outreach BLAKE, BLAKE2, SipHash, NORX Crypto Coding Standard Password Hashing Competition Open Crypto Audit Project board member do you use passwords? this talk might interest you! Oct 2013 "hash" = 3DES-ECB( static key, password ) users' hint made the guess game easy... (credit Jeremi Gosney / Stricture Group) May 2014; "encrypted passwords" (?) last week that's only the reported/published cases Lesson if Adobe, eBay, and Avast fail to protect their users' passwords, what about others? users using "weak passwords"? ITsec people using "weak defenses"? developers using "weak hashes"? cryptographers, who never bothered? agenda 1. how (not) to protect passwords 2. the Password Hashing Competition (PHC) 3. the 24-2 PHC candidates 4. next steps, and how to contribute WARNING this is NOT about bikeshed topics as: password policies password managers password-strength meters will-technology-X-replace-passwords? 1. how (not) to protect passwords solution of the 60's store "password" or the modern alternative: obviously a bad idea (assuming the server and its DB are compromised) solution of the early 70's store hash("password") "one-way": can't be efficiently inverted vulnerable to: ● efficient dictionary attacks and bruteforce ● time-memory tradeoffs (rainbow tables, etc.) solution of the late 70's store hash("password", salt) "one-way": can't be efficiently inverted immune to time-memory tradeoffs vulnerable to: ● dictionary attacks and bruteforce (but has to be repeated for different hashes) solution of the 2000's store hash("password", salt, cost) "one-way": can't be efficiently inverted immune to time-memory tradeoffs inefficient dictionary attacks and bruteforce main ideas: ● be "slow" ● especially on attackers' hardware (GPU, FPGA) => exploit fast CPU memory access/writes PBKDF2 (Kaliski, 2000) NIST and PKCS standard in Truecrypt, iOS, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 – Block Ciphers and the Data Encryption Standard
    Chapter 3 –Block Ciphers and the Data Cryptography and Network Encryption Standard Security All the afternoon Mungo had been working on Stern's Chapter 3 code, principally with the aid of the latest messages which he had copied down at the Nevin Square drop. Stern was very confident. He must be well aware London Central knew about that drop. It was obvious Fifth Edition that they didn't care how often Mungo read their messages, so confident were they in the by William Stallings impenetrability of the code. —Talking to Strange Men, Ruth Rendell Lecture slides by Lawrie Brown Modern Block Ciphers Block vs Stream Ciphers now look at modern block ciphers • block ciphers process messages in blocks, each one of the most widely used types of of which is then en/decrypted cryptographic algorithms • like a substitution on very big characters provide secrecy /hii/authentication services – 64‐bits or more focus on DES (Data Encryption Standard) • stream ciphers process messages a bit or byte at a time when en/decrypting to illustrate block cipher design principles • many current ciphers are block ciphers – better analysed – broader range of applications Block vs Stream Ciphers Block Cipher Principles • most symmetric block ciphers are based on a Feistel Cipher Structure • needed since must be able to decrypt ciphertext to recover messages efficiently • bloc k cihiphers lklook like an extremely large substitution • would need table of 264 entries for a 64‐bit block • instead create from smaller building blocks • using idea of a product cipher 1 Claude
    [Show full text]
  • Feistel Like Construction of Involutory Binary Matrices with High Branch Number
    Feistel Like Construction of Involutory Binary Matrices With High Branch Number Adnan Baysal1,2, Mustafa C¸oban3, and Mehmet Ozen¨ 3 1TUB¨ ITAK_ - BILGEM,_ PK 74, 41470, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey, [email protected] 2Kocaeli University, Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Science, 41380, Umuttepe, Kocaeli, Turkey 3Sakarya University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Mathematics, Sakarya, Turkey, [email protected], [email protected] August 4, 2016 Abstract In this paper, we propose a generic method to construct involutory binary matrices from a three round Feistel scheme with a linear round function. We prove bounds on the maximum achievable branch number (BN) and the number of fixed points of our construction. We also define two families of efficiently implementable round functions to be used in our method. The usage of these families in the proposed method produces matrices achieving the proven bounds on branch numbers and fixed points. Moreover, we show that BN of the transpose matrix is the same with the original matrix for the function families we defined. Some of the generated matrices are Maximum Distance Binary Linear (MDBL), i.e. matrices with the highest achievable BN. The number of fixed points of the generated matrices are close to the expected value for a random involution. Generated matrices are especially suitable for utilising in bitslice block ciphers and hash functions. They can be implemented efficiently in many platforms, from low cost CPUs to dedicated hardware. Keywords: Diffusion layer, bitslice cipher, hash function, involution, MDBL matrices, Fixed points. 1 Introduction Modern block ciphers and hash functions use two basic layers iteratively to provide security: confusion and diffusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Selected Block Cipher Modes for Authenticated Encryption
    Analysis of Selected Block Cipher Modes for Authenticated Encryption by Hassan Musallam Ahmed Qahur Al Mahri Bachelor of Engineering (Computer Systems and Networks) (Sultan Qaboos University) – 2007 Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Science and Engineering Faculty Queensland University of Technology 2018 Keywords Authenticated encryption, AE, AEAD, ++AE, AEZ, block cipher, CAESAR, confidentiality, COPA, differential fault analysis, differential power analysis, ElmD, fault attack, forgery attack, integrity assurance, leakage resilience, modes of op- eration, OCB, OTR, SHELL, side channel attack, statistical fault analysis, sym- metric encryption, tweakable block cipher, XE, XEX. i ii Abstract Cryptography assures information security through different functionalities, es- pecially confidentiality and integrity assurance. According to Menezes et al. [1], confidentiality means the process of assuring that no one could interpret infor- mation, except authorised parties, while data integrity is an assurance that any unauthorised alterations to a message content will be detected. One possible ap- proach to ensure confidentiality and data integrity is to use two different schemes where one scheme provides confidentiality and the other provides integrity as- surance. A more compact approach is to use schemes, called Authenticated En- cryption (AE) schemes, that simultaneously provide confidentiality and integrity assurance for a message. AE can be constructed using different mechanisms, and the most common construction is to use block cipher modes, which is our focus in this thesis. AE schemes have been used in a wide range of applications, and defined by standardisation organizations. The National Institute of Standards and Technol- ogy (NIST) recommended two AE block cipher modes CCM [2] and GCM [3].
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Password Security for System Designers What to Consider When Building a Password-Based Authentication System
    Modern password security for system designers What to consider when building a password-based authentication system By Ian Maddox and Kyle Moschetto, Google Cloud Solutions Architects This whitepaper describes and models modern password guidance and recommendations for the designers and engineers who create secure online applications. A related whitepaper, Password security ​ for users, offers guidance for end users. This whitepaper covers the wide range of options to consider ​ when building a password-based authentication system. It also establishes a set of user-focused recommendations for password policies and storage, including the balance of password strength and usability. The technology world has been trying to improve on the password since the early days of computing. Shared-knowledge authentication is problematic because information can fall into the wrong hands or be forgotten. The problem is magnified by systems that don't support real-world secure use cases and by the frequent decision of users to take shortcuts. According to a 2019 Yubico/Ponemon study, 69 percent of respondents admit to sharing passwords with ​ ​ their colleagues to access accounts. More than half of respondents (51 percent) reuse an average of five passwords across their business and personal accounts. Furthermore, two-factor authentication is not widely used, even though it adds protection beyond a username and password. Of the respondents, 67 percent don’t use any form of two-factor authentication in their personal life, and 55 percent don’t use it at work. Password systems often allow, or even encourage, users to use insecure passwords. Systems that allow only single-factor credentials and that implement ineffective security policies add to the problem.
    [Show full text]
  • The EAX Mode of Operation
    A preliminary version of this papers appears in Fast Software Encryption ’04, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. ?? , R. Bimal and W. Meier ed., Springer-Verlag, 2004. This is the full version. The EAX Mode of Operation (A Two-Pass Authenticated-Encryption Scheme Optimized for Simplicity and Efficiency) ∗ † ‡ M. BELLARE P. ROGAWAY D. WAGNER January 18, 2004 Abstract We propose a block-cipher mode of operation, EAX, for solving the problem of authenticated-encryption with associated-data (AEAD). Given a nonce N, a message M, and a header H, our mode protects the privacy of M and the authenticity of both M and H. Strings N, M, and H are arbitrary bit strings, and the mode uses 2|M|/n + |H|/n + |N|/n block-cipher calls when these strings are nonempty and n is the block length of the underlying block cipher. Among EAX’s characteristics are that it is on-line (the length of a message isn’t needed to begin processing it) and a fixed header can be pre-processed, effectively removing the per-message cost of binding it to the ciphertext. EAX is obtained by first creating a generic-composition method, EAX2, and then collapsing its two keys into one. EAX is provably secure under a standard complexity-theoretic assumption. The proof of this fact is novel and involved. EAX is an alternative to CCM [26], which was created to answer the wish within standards bodies for a fully-specified and patent-free AEAD mode. As such, CCM and EAX are two-pass schemes, with one pass for achieving privacy and one for authenticity.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimizing a Password Hashing Function with Hardware-Accelerated Symmetric Encryption
    S S symmetry Article Optimizing a Password Hashing Function with Hardware-Accelerated Symmetric Encryption Rafael Álvarez 1,* , Alicia Andrade 2 and Antonio Zamora 3 1 Departamento de Ciencia de la Computación e Inteligencia Artificial (DCCIA), Universidad de Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain 2 Fac. Ingeniería, Ciencias Físicas y Matemática, Universidad Central, Quito 170129, Ecuador; [email protected] 3 Departamento de Ciencia de la Computación e Inteligencia Artificial (DCCIA), Universidad de Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 2 November 2018; Accepted: 22 November 2018; Published: 3 December 2018 Abstract: Password-based key derivation functions (PBKDFs) are commonly used to transform user passwords into keys for symmetric encryption, as well as for user authentication, password hashing, and preventing attacks based on custom hardware. We propose two optimized alternatives that enhance the performance of a previously published PBKDF. This design is based on (1) employing a symmetric cipher, the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), as a pseudo-random generator and (2) taking advantage of the support for the hardware acceleration for AES that is available on many common platforms in order to mitigate common attacks to password-based user authentication systems. We also analyze their security characteristics, establishing that they are equivalent to the security of the core primitive (AES), and we compare their performance with well-known PBKDF algorithms, such as Scrypt and Argon2, with favorable results. Keywords: symmetric; encryption; password; hash; cryptography; PBKDF 1. Introduction Key derivation functions are employed to obtain one or more keys from a master secret. This is especially useful in the case of user passwords, which can be of arbitrary length and are unsuitable to be used directly as fixed-size cipher keys, so, there must be a process for converting passwords into secret keys.
    [Show full text]