Re: Side-channel leakage in the mpz_powm_sec interface

2023-09-07 Thread Hubert Kario
On Friday, 25 August 2023 14:02:51 CEST, Niels Möller wrote: Hubert Kario writes: On Friday, 25 August 2023 07:51:10 CEST, Niels Möller wrote: Thus, I think it's more of a documentation issue than code issue: it will be much better to just say that mpz_powm_sec() is not usable

Re: Side-channel leakage in the mpz_powm_sec interface

2023-08-25 Thread Hubert Kario
On Friday, 25 August 2023 07:51:10 CEST, Niels Möller wrote: Hubert Kario writes: I was able to confirm that the low-level functions, like the mpn_sec_powm() function have no timing leakage with regards to operands or result (exactly like section 8.1 of the manual[2] states). And that's

Re: Side-channel leakage in the mpz_powm_sec interface

2023-08-25 Thread Hubert Kario
hat should be performed by upper level code, as how you do blinding depends on the algorithm and operation you're performing like, both RSA signing and decryption mathematically perform the exact same operation, but what constitutes side-channel free for them is very different -- Regards, Hubert Kario

Re: Side-channel leakage in the mpz_powm_sec interface

2023-08-25 Thread Hubert Kario
On Friday, 25 August 2023 14:02:51 CEST, Niels Möller wrote: Hubert Kario writes: On Friday, 25 August 2023 07:51:10 CEST, Niels Möller wrote: And that's for all inputs? Nice. Well, not all, I mostly tested ones that had obvious patterns, like zero to power zero, 0xff to power 0xff, full

Side-channel leakage in the mpz_powm_sec interface

2023-08-24 Thread Hubert Kario
d I miss the methods to ensure that the objects are not clamped, or should the mpz_powm_sec() interface be marked as _not_ secure for cryptographic purposes? 1 - https://gmplib.org/manual/Integer-Exponentiation#index-mpz_005fpowm_005fsec 2 - https://gmplib.org/manual/Low_002dlevel-Functions -- R