1 Reply by demetrispanos

(4 replies, posted in wolfSSL)

Ah, great. Well, thanks for the speedy resolution! It's been a pleasure using wolfSSL and this was the only remaining snag in my application smile

Go to forum: wolfSSL

2 Reply by demetrispanos

(4 replies, posted in wolfSSL)

Thanks Chris. I may be doing something else wrong then. Here are some more details.

When I use 2048 bit DH parameters (example 1 below), I get everything working as I expect even when using 4096 bit RSA (i.e. I think the FP_MAX_BITS thing is correctly set).

However when I use 4096 bit DH parameters (example 2 below), I get "error = -228, malformed buffer input error" when calling SSL_connect() on the client and "error = 6, peer sent close notify alert" when calling SSL_accept on the server (I assume the server is just choking because the client saw something it didn't like and gave up).

This is the call I use to load the DH parameters:

return CyaSSL_CTX_SetTmpDH_buffer
      (ctx, (byte*) dhp, strlen(dhp), SSL_FILETYPE_PEM) == SSL_SUCCESS ? APP_OK : APP_ERR;

Where dhp is either the string from example 1 or example 2. Example 1 works fine, Example 2 gives me error -228 on the client side of the connection and error 6 on the server.

Any thoughts? I'm using DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 with 4096 bit RSA in case that affects anything, and aside from getting errors when I use DH parameters over 2048 bits everything else works exactly as documented/expected. The DH parameters are generated using the openssl command line tool so I am assuming that they are not actually malformed, but I guess I could be wrong?

Thanks for your time,
Demetri

Example 1:
-----BEGIN DH PARAMETERS-----
MIIBCAKCAQEAqqvsxDHhR8uBPQdV0zKZSEMK/L1qe2kdqzmrbxMCFD22gzXy1Dy7
NDZ0FFpxxBkzS8YDvjzvrnT1fQsGe5WcWc10SoFkijKwgOq/9eBJoHLlOWUKxa5J
2Gkx/p0W9hgxTlmy0dpakgl5qenlxvg3CV/RQ9PIR7H6YSec3FeDd1O04fAiqDxu
/Cczg/Tx1MR4gbg1207L21c8UfKXvESqKG9U+krP0vGHPkFilzViOXeeGTcyC+5l
U+2tT796l8PfKTxwSBkI3z1CCzixUS4LnGK3bumC9+zwxEwduid6fd8XxcdD4ccS
Qf8qo3ibOX+2RoVEoUJmMf4mZ0AEBo6NWwIBAg==
-----END DH PARAMETERS-----

Example 2:
-----BEGIN DH PARAMETERS-----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-----END DH PARAMETERS-----

Go to forum: wolfSSL

3 Topic by demetrispanos

(4 replies, posted in wolfSSL)

Hi,

I was wondering what configure and make options I should use to enable ephemeral DH above 2048 bits. We already have successfully used -DFP_MAX_BITS=8192 to enable 4096 bit RSA and I would like to be able to do the same for the DH parameters.

Thanks,
Demetri

Go to forum: wolfSSL

4 Reply by demetrispanos

(4 replies, posted in wolfSSL)

Chris, thanks for your help! That solved the problem. Should I generally include options.h in all the projects I link with wolfSSL? If so that's easy, I just didn't realize that was necessary.

As for what we're doing, I'm happy to share. We're building a distributed computing client (which will be released as GPL/AGPL) with strong identity management and network security. wolfSSL has been very pleasant to work with smile

Thanks,
Demetri

Go to forum: wolfSSL

5 Reply by demetrispanos

(4 replies, posted in wolfSSL)

In the unlikely case this affects anything: I am also building with -DMAX_FP_BITS=8192 (for 4096 bit RSA). I've tried disabling that and using the default bit width with no observable difference in the HMAC behavior from the original post.

(I understand that the HMAC shouldn't involve any big-integer arithmetic; I just want to make sure all my build options are available for review).

Go to forum: wolfSSL

6 Topic by demetrispanos

(4 replies, posted in wolfSSL)

I've attached a minimal (~15 lines of code) program reproducing what seems to be either:

1) a bug in the implementation of HMAC-SHA256 (I know this seems unlikely)
or
2) a very confusing piece of example text in the manual (but I've literally copy/pasted the example code)

In a nutshell, changing the amount of space allocated for a stack-allocated output buffer (BEYOND the minimum size required for the expected output) seems to have strange effects on the results. So either something is wrong or I'm grossly misunderstanding what the manual is asking me to do.

I've pasted the correct output, erroneous output, and what I believe to be the relevant manual snippet in a  comment inside the test file.

I'm configuring with the following options:

--enable-sha512 --enable-aesgcm --enable-static --enable-dh --enable-opensslextra

I've tried playing with the options and I haven't seen any change in behavior.

I get the same behavior on 2.9 as on 3.2 but I haven't tested any other versions.

Can anyone reproduce this? Or point out what I'm misunderstanding about the example code?

Thanks,
Demetri

Go to forum: wolfSSL