Regarding how to use symmetric key for an openssl engine

[董亚敏 via openssl-users]

Hi,
Here is question,can you help me out? Thanks.
Background:
   I am working to write an openssl engine to use cryptographic algorithm in a 
hardware device. The hardware device support asymmetric/symmetric algorithm, 
for example:rsa/aes.
Question:
  When I write openssl engine, I shall use ENGINE_load_private_key() function 
to load and use asymmetric private key in the hardware device.
  How to set and use symmetric key in the hardware device ? is there any 
example for my case?

#/**本邮件及其附件含有小米公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、或散发）本邮件中的信息。如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件！
 This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from XIAOMI, 
which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. 
Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not 
limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by 
persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this 
e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and 
delete it!**/#

Re: nginx start and stop has issue for openssl engine

[Zhangfei Gao]

Hi,

I am using openssl engine with nginx.
openssl: OpenSSL_1_1_1f

If the engine does not include rsa, everythings works well

If the engine retister rsa, even the empty
IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC_BIND_FN(bind_fn)
bind_fn
ENGINE_set_destroy_function(e, destroy_fn);
ENGINE_set_RSA(e, RSA_meth_new("rsa method", 0));

destroy_fn will NOT be called in nginx start and nginx -s quit.

Have some debug
If has rsa, engine_free_util e->struct_ref > 0, so not call e->destroy(e).

engine_table_select
fnd = lh_ENGINE_PILE_retrieve(&(*table)->piles, );
if (!fnd)
goto end;
if (fnd->funct && engine_unlocked_init(fnd->funct)) {

If no rsa, engine_table_select funciton goto end.
If rsa, engine_table_select call engine_unlocked_init, ref++, for two times.
So at last,  e->destroy(e will not be called in engine_free_util.

Has anyone seen this issue?

Thanks

Linking OpenSSL engine with a third party dynamic library

[Shariful Alam]

Hello,
I have a custom OpenSSL engine and it is working fine with pthread. I was
trying to use a third-party thread library
<https://github.com/stonebuddha/uthread> by linking this library with my
engine. However, upon linking and running the engine, I'm getting a
Segmentation fault. I just could not figure out why. I have a hunch that my
linking with the newly built dynamic library is not correct,

Following is what I did
1. Compile the thread library as a dynamic library

CC  = gcc
CFLAGS  = -Wall -fPIC -g -O3 -MD
LDFLAGS = -shared
OBJ = uthread.o


all: libuthread.so


libuthread.so: $(OBJ)

$(LD) -shared -o $(@) $(OBJ)


clean:

rm -f *.o *.d libuthread.so


-include *.d


%.o: %.c

$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ -c $<

2. Copy this library to */lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/*
3. My Make file to compile my OpenSSL engine

*gcc -g -fPIC -c -fomit-frame-pointer rsa-engine.c*
*gcc -g -shared -o librsa_engine.so -L./libdune rsa-engine.o rsa/rsa.o
rsa/bignum.o rsa/aes.o -Wl,-Bstatic -ldune -Wl,-Bdynamic -lcrypto -luthread*

*mv librsa_engine.so rsa-engine-new.so*

4. After compilation, $*ldd rsa-engine-new.so*  shows the following,


linux-vdso.so.1 =>  (0x7ffded367000)

libcrypto.so.1.1 => /opt/openssl/lib/libcrypto.so.1.1 (0x7f895c5fa000)
libuthread.so => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libuthread.so (0x7f895c3f4000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f895c02a000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0x7f895be26000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0
(0x7f895bc09000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f895cd56000)

I use gdb to find out what causes the segmentation fault, I find out
that *uthread_join(),
*is failing at some point. Can someone please tell me what I'm, doing
wrong?
N.B: I checked the library with a simple program and the library works
fine.

Thanks,
Shariful

Re: Is it possible to use a global lock in the OpenSSL engine on each mod_ssl call?

[Dr Paul Dale]

OpenSSL doesn't have a global lock.
You could implement a single lock in the engine.  Grab it immediately on 
entry and release just before exit.



Pauli

On 11/11/21 8:24 am, Shariful Alam wrote:

Hello,
I understand this is a weird question. I have an OpenSSL engine only 
for RSA. And I have apache installed that uses this OpenSSL engine for 
the HTTPS connection.


I was wondering if it is possible to use a global lock with the 
OpenSSL on mod_ssl call? So that, only one mod_ssl thread cal call the 
engine at a time?


Thanks,
Shariful

Is it possible to use a global lock in the OpenSSL engine on each mod_ssl call?

[Shariful Alam]

Hello,
I understand this is a weird question. I have an OpenSSL engine only for
RSA. And I have apache installed that uses this OpenSSL engine for the
HTTPS connection.

I was wondering if it is possible to use a global lock with the OpenSSL on
mod_ssl call? So that, only one mod_ssl thread cal call the engine at a
time?

Thanks,
Shariful

Re: Calling OpenSSL functions from custom openssl engine causing segmentation fault?

[Dmitry Belyavsky]

Hello,

Usually you don't, and if you compile it against the same major release, no
problems happen.
I'd suggest you to look at the backtrace.

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 3:03 AM Shariful Alam  wrote:

> Hello,
> I have installed OpenSSL 1.1.1c. I'm trying to make a custom OpenSSL
> engine for RSA. The following sample code is copied from the engine
> *e_dasync.c. *
>
>
> Following is a sample code for my RSA engine (*rsa-engine.c*),
> ===
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> */* Engine Id and Name */static const char *engine_rsa_id =
> "rsa-engine-new";static const char *engine_rsa_name = "RSA engine for
> testing";// data encryption functionstatic int eng_rsa_pub_enc(int flen,
> const unsigned char *from, unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int padding) {
> printf("RSA Engine is encrypting using public key\n");return
> RSA_meth_get_pub_enc(RSA_PKCS1_OpenSSL())
> (flen,from,to,rsa,padding);}// signature verifystatic int
> eng_rsa_pub_dec(int flen, const unsigned char *from,
>   unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int padding) {printf("Signature
> verification\n");return 0;}// signaturestatic int eng_rsa_priv_enc(int
> flen, const unsigned char *from, unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int
> padding){printf("Signature method:\n");return 0;}// data
> decryptionstatic int eng_rsa_priv_dec(int flen, const unsigned char *from,
> unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int padding){   printf("decryption
> method:\n");   return 0; }static RSA_METHOD *test_rsa_method = NULL;static
> int bind_dasync(ENGINE *e){/* Setup RSA_METHOD */if
> ((test_rsa_method = RSA_meth_new("Test RSA Engine", 0)) == NULL||
> RSA_meth_set_pub_enc(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_pub_enc) == 0||
> RSA_meth_set_pub_dec(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_pub_dec) == 0||
> RSA_meth_set_priv_enc(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_priv_enc) == 0||
> RSA_meth_set_priv_dec(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_priv_dec) == 0)
> {return 0;}/* Ensure the dasync error handling is set up
> */if (!ENGINE_set_id(e, engine_rsa_id)|| !ENGINE_set_name(e,
> engine_rsa_name)|| !ENGINE_set_RSA(e, test_rsa_method))
> {return 0;}return 1;}static int bind_helper(ENGINE *e,
> const char *id){if (!bind_dasync(e)){printf("2_Error: Inside
> Bind helper\n");return 0;}return
> 1;}IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC_BIND_FN(bind_helper)IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC_CHECK_FN()*
> ===
>
> My *Makefile *looks like the following,
> ===
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *rsa-engine: gcc -g -fPIC -c rsa-engine.c gcc -g -shared -o
> librsa_engine.so -L./libdune rsa-engine.o -Bdynamic -lcrypto -lpthread mv
> librsa_engine.so rsa-engine-new.so sudo cp rsa-engine-new.so
> /opt/openssl/lib/engines-1.1/clean: rm -f *.o *.d *.so rsa-engine*
> ===
>
> My code compiles. When I try to do encryption using the following command,
> =
> *openssl rsautl -encrypt -inkey public.pem -pubin -in msg.txt -out msg.enc
> -engine rsa-engine-new*
> =
>
> I get a segmentation fault,
> 
>
>
> *engine "rsa-engine-new" set.RSA Engine is encrypting using public
> keySegmentation fault (core dumped)*
> 
>
> Do I need to Compile this sample engine with the OpenSSL in order for it
> to work?
>
> Regards,
> Shariful Alam
>
>
>

-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky

Calling OpenSSL functions from custom openssl engine causing segmentation fault?

[Shariful Alam]

Hello,
I have installed OpenSSL 1.1.1c. I'm trying to make a custom OpenSSL engine
for RSA. The following sample code is copied from the engine *e_dasync.c. *


Following is a sample code for my RSA engine (*rsa-engine.c*),
===




































































*/* Engine Id and Name */static const char *engine_rsa_id =
"rsa-engine-new";static const char *engine_rsa_name = "RSA engine for
testing";// data encryption functionstatic int eng_rsa_pub_enc(int flen,
const unsigned char *from, unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int padding) {
printf("RSA Engine is encrypting using public key\n");return
RSA_meth_get_pub_enc(RSA_PKCS1_OpenSSL())
(flen,from,to,rsa,padding);}// signature verifystatic int
eng_rsa_pub_dec(int flen, const unsigned char *from,
  unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int padding) {printf("Signature
verification\n");return 0;}// signaturestatic int eng_rsa_priv_enc(int
flen, const unsigned char *from, unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int
padding){printf("Signature method:\n");return 0;}// data
decryptionstatic int eng_rsa_priv_dec(int flen, const unsigned char *from,
unsigned char *to, RSA *rsa, int padding){   printf("decryption
method:\n");   return 0; }static RSA_METHOD *test_rsa_method = NULL;static
int bind_dasync(ENGINE *e){/* Setup RSA_METHOD */if
((test_rsa_method = RSA_meth_new("Test RSA Engine", 0)) == NULL||
RSA_meth_set_pub_enc(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_pub_enc) == 0||
RSA_meth_set_pub_dec(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_pub_dec) == 0||
RSA_meth_set_priv_enc(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_priv_enc) == 0||
RSA_meth_set_priv_dec(test_rsa_method, eng_rsa_priv_dec) == 0)
{return 0;}/* Ensure the dasync error handling is set up
*/if (!ENGINE_set_id(e, engine_rsa_id)|| !ENGINE_set_name(e,
engine_rsa_name)|| !ENGINE_set_RSA(e, test_rsa_method))
{return 0;}return 1;}static int bind_helper(ENGINE *e,
const char *id){if (!bind_dasync(e)){printf("2_Error: Inside
Bind helper\n");return 0;}return
1;}IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC_BIND_FN(bind_helper)IMPLEMENT_DYNAMIC_CHECK_FN()*
===

My *Makefile *looks like the following,
===







*rsa-engine: gcc -g -fPIC -c rsa-engine.c gcc -g -shared -o
librsa_engine.so -L./libdune rsa-engine.o -Bdynamic -lcrypto -lpthread mv
librsa_engine.so rsa-engine-new.so sudo cp rsa-engine-new.so
/opt/openssl/lib/engines-1.1/clean: rm -f *.o *.d *.so rsa-engine*
===

My code compiles. When I try to do encryption using the following command,
=
*openssl rsautl -encrypt -inkey public.pem -pubin -in msg.txt -out msg.enc
-engine rsa-engine-new*
=

I get a segmentation fault,



*engine "rsa-engine-new" set.RSA Engine is encrypting using public
keySegmentation fault (core dumped)*


Do I need to Compile this sample engine with the OpenSSL in order for it to
work?

Regards,
Shariful Alam

How to load a custom OpenSSL engine automatically?

[Shariful Alam]

Hello,
I have a custom OpenSSL engine for experiment purposes. I'm trying to load
my engine automatically. I intend to use my custom engine instead of the
default OpenSSL engine. I have installed *OpenSSL 1.1.1c *from the source
code with,

*./config --prefix=/opt/openssl -DOPENSSL_LOAD_CONF
--openssldir=/opt/openssl/ssl *

configuration. And add the following lines to my *openssl.cnf,*

openssl_conf = openssl_def

[openssl_def]
engines = engine_section

[engine_section]
rsa-engine-new = rsa_section

[rsa_section]
engine_id = rsa-engine-new
#dynamic_path = /opt/openssl/lib/engines-1.1/rsa-engine-new.so  <--
Uncomment this line cause segmentation fault

after this, when I try to list available engine, I get the following error,

ss@ss:/usr/local/lib$ openssl engine
rsa-engine-new
(rdrand) Intel RDRAND engine
(dynamic) Dynamic engine loading support
(rsa-engine-new) engine for testing 1
140659701942016:error:260AB089:engine
routines:ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string:invalid cmd
name:crypto/engine/eng_ctrl.c:255:
140659701942016:error:260BC066:engine routines:int_engine_configure:engine
configuration error:crypto/engine/eng_cnf.c:141:section=rsa_section,
name=oid_section, value=new_oids
140659701942016:error:0E07606D:configuration file
routines:module_run:module initialization
error:crypto/conf/conf_mod.c:177:module=engines, value=engine_section,
retcode=-1


My engine is loading automatically and it is used as a default engine, but
why I'm seeing those errors? And how can I fix it?

Sincerely,
Shariful Alam

Re: Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl 1.1.0

[Richard Levitte]

You can ask the openssl app where it goes looking for engines by
default.  Here's what it looks like with the installed openssl on my
machine:

: ; openssl version -e
ENGINESDIR: "/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/engines-1.1"

Note that engines aren't agnostic to the OpenSSL version...

Cheers,
Richard

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 10:06:53 +0200,
Swamy J-S wrote:
> 
> 
> Am working in Ubuntu 18.04 with openssl 1.1.0g version. I built a custom 
> openssl engine and now i
> want to use this engine instead of default openssl engine.
> 
> My engine library name is libstoreengine.so and i copied this to 
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/
> openssl-1.0.0/engines/ path.
> 
> When i run my application the it says Store Engine not found. There is path 
> issue here, am i
> copying the library in right path? I copied my library in 
> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu still am getting
> same error.
> 
> Please let me know the right path where i have to copy this engine?
> 
> Thanks and Regards,
> 
> SWAMY J S
> 
> 
-- 
Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/

Re: Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl 1.1.0

[Dmitry Belyavsky]

Hello,

On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:36 AM Swamy J-S  wrote:

> Hi, Thanks for reply. I have a doubt here. Which config file you are
> referring too? Is there any file called “*config*” which is already
> existing somewhere or should I create a dummy file called config?
>
>
>
> Just now I created a dummy file “*config*” and added the details you sent
> in this file.
>
>
>
> Also added “*export OPENSSL_CONF=path_to_config*” in /etc/environment
> file. And ran the command “*openssl engine store -t -c*”.
>

Did you specify the correct dynamic_path?
Does the strace (in Linux) command report, that the config file and the
engine is read?

Still am getting same error as store not found when I run my application.
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *SWAMY J S*
>
>
>
> *From:* Dmitry Belyavsky 
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 25, 2019 1:44 PM
> *To:* Swamy J-S 
> *Cc:* openssl-users@openssl.org
> *Subject:* Re: Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl
> 1.1.0
>
>
>
> *CAUTION:* This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> You should load your engine via config file.
>
>
>
> It may look like
>
> =
>
> openssl_conf = openssl_def
>
>
>
> [openssl_def]
>
> engines = engine_section
>
>
>
> [engine_section]
>
> storeengine = store_section
>
>
>
> [store_section]
>
> engine_id = store
>
> dynamic_path = /usr/local/lib/engines/storeengine.so
>
> 
>
>
>
> Your application should load the config file, the way it works is
> different for different versions.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:07 AM Swamy J-S  wrote:
>
> Am working in Ubuntu 18.04 with openssl 1.1.0g version. I built a custom
> openssl engine and now i want to use this engine instead of default openssl
> engine.
>
> My engine library name is libstoreengine.so and i copied this to
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/openssl-1.0.0/engines/ path.
>
>
>
> When i run my application the it says Store Engine not found. There is
> path issue here, am i copying the library in right path? I copied my
> library in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu still am getting same error.
>
> Please let me know the right path where i have to copy this engine?
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *SWAMY J S*
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
>


-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky

RE: Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl 1.1.0

[Swamy J-S]

Hi, Thanks for reply. I have a doubt here. Which config file you are referring 
too? Is there any file called “config” which is already existing somewhere or 
should I create a dummy file called config?

Just now I created a dummy file “config” and added the details you sent in this 
file.

Also added “export OPENSSL_CONF=path_to_config” in /etc/environment file. And 
ran the command “openssl engine store -t -c”.
Still am getting same error as store not found when I run my application.

Thanks and Regards,
SWAMY J S

From: Dmitry Belyavsky 
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 1:44 PM
To: Swamy J-S 
Cc: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl 1.1.0

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

Hello,

You should load your engine via config file.

It may look like
=
openssl_conf = openssl_def

[openssl_def]
engines = engine_section

[engine_section]
storeengine = store_section

[store_section]
engine_id = store
dynamic_path = /usr/local/lib/engines/storeengine.so


Your application should load the config file, the way it works is different for 
different versions.


On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:07 AM Swamy J-S 
mailto:swamy@in.abb.com>> wrote:

Am working in Ubuntu 18.04 with openssl 1.1.0g version. I built a custom 
openssl engine and now i want to use this engine instead of default openssl 
engine.

My engine library name is libstoreengine.so and i copied this to 
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/openssl-1.0.0/engines/ path.



When i run my application the it says Store Engine not found. There is path 
issue here, am i copying the library in right path? I copied my library in 
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu still am getting same error.

Please let me know the right path where i have to copy this engine?

Thanks and Regards,
SWAMY J S



--
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky

Re: Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl 1.1.0

[Dmitry Belyavsky]

Hello,

You should load your engine via config file.

It may look like
=
openssl_conf = openssl_def

[openssl_def]
engines = engine_section

[engine_section]
storeengine = store_section

[store_section]
engine_id = store
dynamic_path = /usr/local/lib/engines/storeengine.so


Your application should load the config file, the way it works is different
for different versions.


On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:07 AM Swamy J-S  wrote:

> Am working in Ubuntu 18.04 with openssl 1.1.0g version. I built a custom
> openssl engine and now i want to use this engine instead of default openssl
> engine.
>
> My engine library name is libstoreengine.so and i copied this to
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/openssl-1.0.0/engines/ path.
>
>
>
> When i run my application the it says Store Engine not found. There is
> path issue here, am i copying the library in right path? I copied my
> library in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu still am getting same error.
>
> Please let me know the right path where i have to copy this engine?
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *SWAMY J S*
>
>
>


-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky

Where to copy custom openssl engine library in openssl 1.1.0

[Swamy J-S]

Am working in Ubuntu 18.04 with openssl 1.1.0g version. I built a custom 
openssl engine and now i want to use this engine instead of default openssl 
engine.

My engine library name is libstoreengine.so and i copied this to 
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/openssl-1.0.0/engines/ path.



When i run my application the it says Store Engine not found. There is path 
issue here, am i copying the library in right path? I copied my library in 
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu still am getting same error.

Please let me know the right path where i have to copy this engine?

Thanks and Regards,
SWAMY J S

Troubles using Openssl ENGINE

[Gael GUEGAN]

Hello all,

I am currently having some trouble using an openssl engine with nginx.

I was having no problems using it for loading private key through my engine.
However after adding new capabilities about symmetric encryption (AES) to the 
engine, nginx is trying to use my engine instead of the default openssl 
implementation at some point.

And so the handshake is failing, trying to use the symmetric encryption of my 
engine that I don't want him to use, here a debug log :

2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: epoll timer: 59601
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: epoll: fd:3 ev:0001 d:B6973109
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: *3 SSL handshake handler: 0
Init Cipher Key ... (Debug Log from the engine code)
Cleaning up ... (Debug Log from the engine code)
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: *3 SSL_do_handshake: -1
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: *3 SSL_get_error: 1
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [crit] 9414#0: *3 SSL_do_handshake() failed (SSL: 
error:8009D064:tpm2-tss-engine:tpm2_cipher_init_key:Failed to read TPM2 data) 
while SSL handshaking, client: 192.168.13
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: *3 close http connection: 3
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: *3 event timer del: 3: 24375741
2019/04/09 09:34:37 [debug] 9414#0: *3 reusable connection: 0

My idea was to disable the symmetric functionality of the engine. And I have 
attempted to modify the file ngx_event_openssl.c by calling the function 
ENGINE_unregister_ciphers(...) or ENGINE_set_default(engine, 
ENGINE_METHOD_PKEY_METHS) or configuring the openssl.cnf with only RSA algo.
I have succeeded to do it in a small c code of mine, but in nginx it is like 
some function are resetting my configuration like SSL_CTX_new().

Is someone has an idea on how to resolve my problems ? I would highly 
appreciate some help.

Other information :
~$ sudo /usr/sbin/nginx -V
nginx version: nginx/1.12.1
built with OpenSSL 1.1.0h  27 Mar 2018
TLS SNI support enabled
configure arguments: --crossbuild=Linux:arm --with-endian=big --with-int=4 
--with-long=4 --with-long-long=8 --with-ptr-size=4 --with-sig-atomic-t=4 
--with-size-t=4 --with-off-t=4 --with-time-t=4 --with-sg

Here a link to the engine : https://github.com/tpm2-software/tpm2-tss-engine




Gael GUEGAN

Re: [openssl-users] ED25519 key with openssl engine

[Paras Shah (parashah) via openssl-users]

I had the same doubt. I have x-posed this question on the opensc mailing list 
as well.

On 9/17/18, 3:37 PM, "openssl-users on behalf of Matt Caswell" 
 wrote:

Perhaps the pkcs11 engine does not support ed25519 keys?

Matt

On 17/09/18 22:05, Paras Shah (parashah) via openssl-users wrote:
> I get the following error when I try to access the ed25519 key stored in
> SoftHSM via the openssl engine interface using engine_pkcs11.
> 
>  
> 
> []:~$ openssl pkey -in
> 
"pkcs11:model=SoftHSM%20v2;manufacturer=SoftHSM%20project;serial=6a160d52b750862f;token=token%202.5.0-rc1;id=%22%22;object=ed25519%20leaf%20key;type=private"
> -inform ENGINE -engine pkcs11 -text
> 
> engine "pkcs11" set.
> 
> Enter PKCS#11 token PIN for token 2.5.0-rc1:
> 
> Key not found.
> 
> PKCS11_get_private_key returned NULL
> 
> cannot load key from engine
> 
> 140736065815424:error:80067065:pkcs11 engine:ctx_load_privkey:object not
> found:eng_back.c:862:
> 
> 140736065815424:error:26096080:engine
> routines:ENGINE_load_private_key:failed loading private
> key:crypto/engine/eng_pkey.c:78:
> 
> unable to load key
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> The openssl version used above is 1.1.1. which supports the ed25519
> keys. The softhsm is v2.5.0-rc1 which also support the ed25519 keys.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -- 
> 
> Paras
> 
> 
> 
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users


-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] ED25519 key with openssl engine

[Matt Caswell]

Perhaps the pkcs11 engine does not support ed25519 keys?

Matt

On 17/09/18 22:05, Paras Shah (parashah) via openssl-users wrote:
> I get the following error when I try to access the ed25519 key stored in
> SoftHSM via the openssl engine interface using engine_pkcs11.
> 
>  
> 
> []:~$ openssl pkey -in
> "pkcs11:model=SoftHSM%20v2;manufacturer=SoftHSM%20project;serial=6a160d52b750862f;token=token%202.5.0-rc1;id=%22%22;object=ed25519%20leaf%20key;type=private"
> -inform ENGINE -engine pkcs11 -text
> 
> engine "pkcs11" set.
> 
> Enter PKCS#11 token PIN for token 2.5.0-rc1:
> 
> Key not found.
> 
> PKCS11_get_private_key returned NULL
> 
> cannot load key from engine
> 
> 140736065815424:error:80067065:pkcs11 engine:ctx_load_privkey:object not
> found:eng_back.c:862:
> 
> 140736065815424:error:26096080:engine
> routines:ENGINE_load_private_key:failed loading private
> key:crypto/engine/eng_pkey.c:78:
> 
> unable to load key
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> The openssl version used above is 1.1.1. which supports the ed25519
> keys. The softhsm is v2.5.0-rc1 which also support the ed25519 keys.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -- 
> 
> Paras
> 
> 
> 
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

[openssl-users] ED25519 key with openssl engine

[Paras Shah (parashah) via openssl-users]

I get the following error when I try to access the ed25519 key stored in 
SoftHSM via the openssl engine interface using engine_pkcs11.

[]:~$ openssl pkey -in 
"pkcs11:model=SoftHSM%20v2;manufacturer=SoftHSM%20project;serial=6a160d52b750862f;token=token%202.5.0-rc1;id=%22%22;object=ed25519%20leaf%20key;type=private"
 -inform ENGINE -engine pkcs11 -text
engine "pkcs11" set.
Enter PKCS#11 token PIN for token 2.5.0-rc1:
Key not found.
PKCS11_get_private_key returned NULL
cannot load key from engine
140736065815424:error:80067065:pkcs11 engine:ctx_load_privkey:object not 
found:eng_back.c:862:
140736065815424:error:26096080:engine routines:ENGINE_load_private_key:failed 
loading private key:crypto/engine/eng_pkey.c:78:
unable to load key


The openssl version used above is 1.1.1. which supports the ed25519 keys. The 
softhsm is v2.5.0-rc1 which also support the ed25519 keys.


--
Paras
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] How to make OpenSSL engine usage application specific?

[Linsell, StevenX]

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 Jayalakshmi Bhat wrote:
> 
> Engine usage is application specific.There are couple of applications
> dependent on RSA TPM? engine. And are few applications dependent on
> RSA smart card engine.?
> 
> We wanted to know if there are any APIs provided by OpenSSL to make the
> engine usage application specific? Is there any way we can make OpenSSL
> chose specific engine for
> 
> specific application.
> 

I think but don't quote me that if your applications are using the openssl.cnf 
file to configure the
engine you are going to use, then the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable will 
allow you to
control the configuration file loaded by OpenSSL. This allows you to have 
application specific 
configuration files that load the engine you require and make it the default 
engine. 
This is dependent on your application having been built with OPENSSL_LOAD_CONF 
defined.
You can also control the config file loaded programmatically via OPENSSL_config.

The alternative is loading your engine programmatically such as nginx does:
https://github.com/nginx/nginx/blob/master/src/event/ngx_event_openssl.c#L4193-L4237
and use ENGINE_set_default to make the engine you require the default for that 
application.
Of course that is only useful if you are in control of your applications source 
code.

There are more details here:
https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Library_Initialization
https://www.openssl.org/docs/manmaster/man5/config.html

Steve Linsell   Intel Shannon DCG/CID Software Development Team
stevenx.lins...@intel.com


--
Intel Research and Development Ireland Limited
Registered in Ireland
Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare
Registered Number: 308263


This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole
use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender and delete all copies.

-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] How to make OpenSSL engine usage application specific?

[Paul Dale]

Try RSA_new_method when allocating the RSA_METHOD.  It takes an engine argument 
which will be used for related operations.

 

Pauli

-- 

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption 

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Jayalakshmi bhat [mailto:bhat.jayalaks...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, 19 February 2018 7:16 PM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: [openssl-users] How to make OpenSSL engine usage application specific?

 

Hello All,

 

We have 2 RSA OpenSSL engines in our product. Both the engines performs same 
RSA encyrpt/decrypt operations. For easy explaination I am naming engines as

 

1. RSA smart card  engine 

2. RSA TPM engine 

 

Engine usage is application specific.There are couple of applications dependent 
on RSA TPM  engine. And are few applications dependent on RSA smart card 
engine. 

We wanted to know if there are any APIs provided by OpenSSL to make the engine 
usage application specific? Is there any way we can make OpenSSL chose specific 
engine for

specific application.

 

Regards

Jayalakshmi.

 

 
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

[openssl-users] How to make OpenSSL engine usage application specific?

[Jayalakshmi bhat]

Hello All,

We have 2 RSA OpenSSL engines in our product. Both the engines performs
same RSA encyrpt/decrypt operations. For easy explaination I am naming
engines as

1. RSA smart card  engine
2. RSA TPM engine

Engine usage is application specific.There are couple of applications
dependent on RSA TPM  engine. And are few applications dependent on RSA
smart card engine.
We wanted to know if there are any APIs provided by OpenSSL to make the
engine usage application specific? Is there any way we can make OpenSSL
chose specific engine for
specific application.

Regards
Jayalakshmi.
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Freemon Johnson]

Hi Jayalakshmi,

Is your implementation OSS or intellectual property? If it is OSS can you
please provide the URL?

Regards,
Freemon

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Jayalakshmi bhat <
bhat.jayalaks...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Our device uses TPM to protect certificate private keys. We have written
> engine interface to integrate TPM functionality into OpenSSL. Thus TPM gets
> loaded as an engine instance.
> Also we have mapped RSA operations to TPM APIS as  like
> encryption/decryption etc.
>
> Now we are into few issues. there are few applications that wants to use
> application specific identity certificate. In such cases RSA APIs should
> not get mapped to TPM APIs.
>
> I wanted to know when we use engine instance for encyrption/decryption
> operation, can it be done selectively?
>
> Regards
> Jayalakshmi
>
> --
> openssl-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
>
>
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Michael Wojcik]

> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf
> Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 18:37
>
> Jakob Bohm  wrote:
>
> > Please beware that many TPM chips were recently discovered to contain a
> > broken RSA key generation algorithm, so public/private key pairs keys
> > to be stored in the TPM should probably be generated off-chip (using
> > the OpenSSL software key generator) and imported into the chip,
> > contrary to what would have been best security practice without this
> > firmware bug.
>
> wow, further evidence that everything needs an upgrade path.

Specifically, it's devices using Infineon chips. AIUI, that includes most TPMs 
and many HSMs, but not, for example, the NitroKey HSM.

The researchers who documented the problem, which they've named ROCA, have a 
site for it:
https://crocs.fi.muni.cz/public/papers/rsa_ccs17

They aren't describing the exact nature of the issue yet (at least the last I 
checked), but it has something to do with the RSA primes having a structure 
that lets attackers greatly speed factoring. I can imagine a number of 
optimizations if you know enough about the structure of the primes.

They've provided a Python program that can identify problematic keys with high 
probability, and it's available as a web service, etc. The program doesn't 
reveal what the mystery structural issues are; it seems to be a Bloom filter 
that's been trained to identify vulnerable keys (which is pretty interesting in 
itself).

All that's just based on a pretty cursory look, though, so I may be wrong.

Michael Wojcik 
Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus 


-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Ken Goldman]

On 10/26/2017 3:33 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:

Michael Richardson wrote:


Jakob Bohm  wrote:

wow, further evidence that everything needs an upgrade path.


 From the viewpoint of hardware vendors the upgrade path is selling new
hardware. It's simply like that. Not very sustainable...


All the TPMs I know of have the ability to do a "field upgrade".  They 
can accept vendor signed firmware updates.  In fact, the newer ones can 
switch between TPM 1.2 and the new TPM 2.0 API.


No need to touch the hardware.



--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Richard Levitte]

In message 

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Michael Ströder]

Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Jakob Bohm  wrote:
> >> I wanted to know when we use engine instance for encyrption/decryption
> >> operation, can it be done selectively?
> 
> > Please beware that many TPM chips were recently discovered to contain a
> > broken RSA key generation algorithm, so public/private key pairs keys
> > to be stored in the TPM should probably be generated off-chip (using
> > the OpenSSL software key generator) and imported into the chip,
> > contrary to what would have been best security practice without this
> > firmware bug.
> 
> wow, further evidence that everything needs an upgrade path.

From the viewpoint of hardware vendors the upgrade path is selling new
hardware. It's simply like that. Not very sustainable...

Ciao, Michael.



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Michael Richardson]

Jakob Bohm  wrote:
>> I wanted to know when we use engine instance for encyrption/decryption
>> operation, can it be done selectively?

> Please beware that many TPM chips were recently discovered to contain a
> broken RSA key generation algorithm, so public/private key pairs keys
> to be stored in the TPM should probably be generated off-chip (using
> the OpenSSL software key generator) and imported into the chip,
> contrary to what would have been best security practice without this
> firmware bug.

wow, further evidence that everything needs an upgrade path.

--
]   Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works| network architect  [
] m...@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/|   ruby on rails[



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Jakob Bohm]

On 25/10/2017 19:06, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:

Hi All,

Our device uses TPM to protect certificate private keys. We have 
written engine interface to integrate TPM functionality into OpenSSL. 
Thus TPM gets loaded as an engine instance.
Also we have mapped RSA operations to TPM APIS as  like 
encryption/decryption etc.


Now we are into few issues. there are few applications that wants to 
use application specific identity certificate. In such cases RSA APIs 
should not get mapped to TPM APIs.


I wanted to know when we use engine instance for encyrption/decryption 
operation, can it be done selectively?


Please beware that many TPM chips were recently discovered to contain a 
broken

RSA key generation algorithm, so public/private key pairs keys to be
stored in the TPM should probably be generated off-chip (using the OpenSSL
software key generator) and imported into the chip, contrary to what would
have been best security practice without this firmware bug.

Enjoy

Jakob
--
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S.  https://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2860 Søborg, Denmark.  Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded

--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

[openssl-users] OpenSSL engine and TPM usage.

[Jayalakshmi bhat]

Hi All,

Our device uses TPM to protect certificate private keys. We have written
engine interface to integrate TPM functionality into OpenSSL. Thus TPM gets
loaded as an engine instance.
Also we have mapped RSA operations to TPM APIS as  like
encryption/decryption etc.

Now we are into few issues. there are few applications that wants to use
application specific identity certificate. In such cases RSA APIs should
not get mapped to TPM APIs.

I wanted to know when we use engine instance for encyrption/decryption
operation, can it be done selectively?

Regards
Jayalakshmi
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Freemon Johnson]

Agreed. I can't speak for the gentleman that originated this thread but in
my context the use case would be to store the keys/certs within the TPM
that's all.

Regards,
Freemon

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL <
u...@ll.mit.edu> wrote:

> And in most cases (except those involving TPM-based platform attestation,
> which I don’t think has anything to do with OpenSSL use cases),  a separate
> hardware token (like a smartcard, or an HSM) would IMHO be a much better
> and more usable choice. PKCS#11 engine (libp11) to access those is quite
> popular and work well.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Uri Blumenthal
>
> On 7/7/17, 11:53, "openssl-users on behalf of Michael Wojcik" <
> openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org on behalf of
> michael.woj...@microfocus.com> wrote:
>
> > agreed, but this engine  does not really put the keys inside the TPM
> - instead it sets up a local repository that is encrypted
> > using a key from the TPM. If you look at the way it is designed, it
> is not really secure (as it's not impossible to find the
> > password that was used to encrypt the keys with).
>
> "really secure" is not a useful phrase. Security is a set of
> asymptotic trade-offs between attacker and defender work-factors under a
> threat model. Nothing ever achieves "really secure".
>
> Even a hypothetical OpenSSL engine that performed all cryptographic
> operations on the TPM wouldn't achieve specified security under the TPM
> threat model unless the engine, all of OpenSSL, and whatever is invoking it
> were part of the TCB.
>
> That said, there is certainly a case to be made that an OpenSSL engine
> which performed at least some crypto operations on the TPM is of at least
> academic interest. Someone might want to start with the Trousers engine and
> try extending it. (Enhancing an existing engine generally isn't
> particularly difficult, in my experience, though of course it depends on
> what you're trying to do and what APIs are available.) Or try writing a
> fresh TPM engine using, say, the Windows TPM API.
>
> It might help to know what your use case is.
>
> Michael Wojcik
> Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus
>
>
> --
> openssl-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
>
>
> --
> openssl-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
>
>
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Michael Wojcik]

> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf
> Of Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 10:03
> To: openssl-users@openssl.org
> Subject: Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM
> 
> And in most cases (except those involving TPM-based platform attestation,
> which I don’t think has anything to do with OpenSSL use cases),  a separate
> hardware token (like a smartcard, or an HSM) would IMHO be a much better
> and more usable choice. PKCS#11 engine (libp11) to access those is quite
> popular and work well.

Agreed. I've had good results with OpenSC-based devices such as the NitroKey 
HSM using the OpenSSL PKCS#11 engine. Requires installing the various prereqs 
and a bit of setup and experimentation, but it all works.

On Windows, the CAPI engine can also generally be used to drive HSMs, if they 
don't have a suitable PKCS#11 driver.

Michael Wojcik 
Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus 

 
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL]

And in most cases (except those involving TPM-based platform attestation, which 
I don’t think has anything to do with OpenSSL use cases),  a separate hardware 
token (like a smartcard, or an HSM) would IMHO be a much better and more usable 
choice. PKCS#11 engine (libp11) to access those is quite popular and work well.

--
Regards,
Uri Blumenthal

On 7/7/17, 11:53, "openssl-users on behalf of Michael Wojcik" 
<openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org on behalf of michael.woj...@microfocus.com> 
wrote:

> agreed, but this engine  does not really put the keys inside the TPM - 
instead it sets up a local repository that is encrypted
> using a key from the TPM. If you look at the way it is designed, it is 
not really secure (as it's not impossible to find the 
> password that was used to encrypt the keys with).

"really secure" is not a useful phrase. Security is a set of asymptotic 
trade-offs between attacker and defender work-factors under a threat model. 
Nothing ever achieves "really secure".

Even a hypothetical OpenSSL engine that performed all cryptographic 
operations on the TPM wouldn't achieve specified security under the TPM threat 
model unless the engine, all of OpenSSL, and whatever is invoking it were part 
of the TCB.

That said, there is certainly a case to be made that an OpenSSL engine 
which performed at least some crypto operations on the TPM is of at least 
academic interest. Someone might want to start with the Trousers engine and try 
extending it. (Enhancing an existing engine generally isn't particularly 
difficult, in my experience, though of course it depends on what you're trying 
to do and what APIs are available.) Or try writing a fresh TPM engine using, 
say, the Windows TPM API.

It might help to know what your use case is.

Michael Wojcik 
Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus 


-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Freemon Johnson]

I would personally love to see an implementation of this as well for
OpenSSL. However in the interim you can see how these libraries were
referenced to insert keys into the TPM for OpenSSH. Our team here has also
verified this works nicely. Perhaps this can be extended if you do not wish
to work with Trousers.

https://github.com/ThomasHabets/simple-tpm-pk11



On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Michael Wojcik <
michael.woj...@microfocus.com> wrote:

> > agreed, but this engine  does not really put the keys inside the TPM -
> instead it sets up a local repository that is encrypted
> > using a key from the TPM. If you look at the way it is designed, it is
> not really secure (as it's not impossible to find the
> > password that was used to encrypt the keys with).
>
> "really secure" is not a useful phrase. Security is a set of asymptotic
> trade-offs between attacker and defender work-factors under a threat model.
> Nothing ever achieves "really secure".
>
> Even a hypothetical OpenSSL engine that performed all cryptographic
> operations on the TPM wouldn't achieve specified security under the TPM
> threat model unless the engine, all of OpenSSL, and whatever is invoking it
> were part of the TCB.
>
> That said, there is certainly a case to be made that an OpenSSL engine
> which performed at least some crypto operations on the TPM is of at least
> academic interest. Someone might want to start with the Trousers engine and
> try extending it. (Enhancing an existing engine generally isn't
> particularly difficult, in my experience, though of course it depends on
> what you're trying to do and what APIs are available.) Or try writing a
> fresh TPM engine using, say, the Windows TPM API.
>
> It might help to know what your use case is.
>
> Michael Wojcik
> Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus
>
>
> --
> openssl-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
>
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Michael Wojcik]

> agreed, but this engine  does not really put the keys inside the TPM - 
> instead it sets up a local repository that is encrypted
> using a key from the TPM. If you look at the way it is designed, it is not 
> really secure (as it's not impossible to find the 
> password that was used to encrypt the keys with).

"really secure" is not a useful phrase. Security is a set of asymptotic 
trade-offs between attacker and defender work-factors under a threat model. 
Nothing ever achieves "really secure".

Even a hypothetical OpenSSL engine that performed all cryptographic operations 
on the TPM wouldn't achieve specified security under the TPM threat model 
unless the engine, all of OpenSSL, and whatever is invoking it were part of the 
TCB.

That said, there is certainly a case to be made that an OpenSSL engine which 
performed at least some crypto operations on the TPM is of at least academic 
interest. Someone might want to start with the Trousers engine and try 
extending it. (Enhancing an existing engine generally isn't particularly 
difficult, in my experience, though of course it depends on what you're trying 
to do and what APIs are available.) Or try writing a fresh TPM engine using, 
say, the Windows TPM API.

It might help to know what your use case is.

Michael Wojcik 
Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus 


-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Jan Just Keijser]

Hi,

On 06/07/17 06:39, Christian Hohnstädt wrote:

The trousers project has one.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/trousers/files/OpenSSL%20TPM%20Engine/


agreed, but this engine  does not really put the keys inside the TPM - instead it sets up a local repository that is encrypted 
using a key from the TPM. If you look at the way it is designed, it is not really secure (as it's not impossible to find the 
password that was used to encrypt the keys with).




Am 5. Juli 2017 06:47:24 MESZ schrieb Devang Kubavat 
<devang.kuba...@in.abb.com>:

Hi All,

  1.  Is there any built-in OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ?
  2.  Is there any other OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ? If Yes, How can 
we configure in OpenSSL libraries to use that
engine ?

Please guide me. Thanks.



-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Christian Hohnstädt]

The trousers project has one.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/trousers/files/OpenSSL%20TPM%20Engine/


Christian 

Am 5. Juli 2017 06:47:24 MESZ schrieb Devang Kubavat 
<devang.kuba...@in.abb.com>:
>Hi All,
>
>  1.  Is there any built-in OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ?
>2.  Is there any other OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ? If Yes, How
>can we configure in OpenSSL libraries to use that engine ?
>
>Please guide me. Thanks.
>
>Best Regards,
>Devang

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Salz, Rich via openssl-users]

>  1.  Is there any built-in OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ?

No.

>  2.  Is there any other OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ? If Yes, How can we 
>configure in OpenSSL libraries to use that engine ?

If someone has written one, and can make it available, they should post here.  
I don't know of any, but there may be.
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

[openssl-users] OpenSSL Engine for TPM

[Devang Kubavat]

Hi All,

  1.  Is there any built-in OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ?
  2.  Is there any other OpenSSL Engine to access the TPM ? If Yes, How can we 
configure in OpenSSL libraries to use that engine ?

Please guide me. Thanks.

Best Regards,
Devang
-- 
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Kyle Hamilton]

On 7/5/2014 10:51 AM, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:
 Thanks a lot for the explanation. We have range of products that
 provides network connectivity.

 1.  On these  we would be using TPM to provide additional security.

 2.  On the products that are bit slow in software cryptographic
 operation, we also would be using hardware acceleration chips, that
 would do crypto operations.

I'm going to guess that you are grouping these into class 1 (related
to the TPM) and class 2 (related to offloading).  Since you already
have a thread for class 1, I'll only respond to your class 2
questions here.

For background, FIPS is basically a specific mode of operation for US
Federal agencies, and is targeted specifically to Federal procurement
mandates.  In government systems which are actually required to use FIPS
mode, you are not allowed to use any crypto services (whether from
OpenSSL or from any other device) that don't use an approved FIPS mode
of operation.  No other people actually *need* FIPS mode.  (I tend to
use it whenever I can because it tends to reduce crypto container
information leakage, and also makes it more likely that the cryptography
is correct and interoperable.)

 In this post I wanted to know to support an hardware accelerator that
 supports FIPS enabled algorithms implemented apart from supporting the
 hardware from OpenSSL side, do we need to make changes in FIPS module
 as well.

If I understand you correctly, you wish to alter the FIPS canister to
offload time-consuming operations to hardware acceleration.  If this
understanding is correct, I must regretfully inform you that it cannot
legitimately be done.  Oh, sure, you can technically do it -- but it
would be a modification of the black box, and require a new
validation.  (I don't believe that such an implementation could in fact
be validated, though I could be wrong.  I am not an expert.  But even if
it can be, it cannot be validated with a private-label validation and
would cost upwards of $200,000 to validate.)

Remember, the FIPS canister *as written* is the only way to legitimately
have FIPS mode from OpenSSL.  Once FIPS mode is set, only cryptographic
operations which are provided by the FIPS canister can be performed, and
only by the unmodified code within the FIPS canister.  It cannot be
offloaded, because the FIPS canister cannot be modified to perform the
offloading.  Also, by offloading, you change the boundaries of the
cryptographic provider to include additional, unverified, and quite
possibly incorrect functionality.

To see the requirements of FIPS 140-2, I recommend you download the five
pieces of the specification itself from
http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsFIPS.html .  It is written in
bureaucratese, and you'll likely need several servings of alcohol to get
through it.  You should also read FIPS 200, which describes the minimum
security requirements for federal information and the systems used to
process federal information.  You'll probably want to budget several
servings of alcohol for this one, too.  Once you read these, you'll have
a much stronger understanding of how incredibly foreign the US federal
government's policy on cryptography is to the rest of society.

And remember: for US federal procurement, these are law, and the law
cannot be ignored or violated just because it would make things faster
or easier.  US government doesn't really care about how long it takes,
US government cares that it is done correctly.

-Kyle H

 Both posts looks similar. I apologize  I should have clearly mentioned
 these 2 posts are in different contexts.

 Thanks a lot.

 Regards
 Jayalakshmi




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Jakob Bohm]

On 7/6/2014 10:44 AM, Kyle Hamilton wrote:


On 7/5/2014 10:51 AM, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:

Thanks a lot for the explanation. We have range of products that
provides network connectivity.

1.  On these  we would be using TPM to provide additional security.

2.  On the products that are bit slow in software cryptographic
operation, we also would be using hardware acceleration chips, that
would do crypto operations.


I'm going to guess that you are grouping these into class 1 (related
to the TPM) and class 2 (related to offloading).  Since you already
have a thread for class 1, I'll only respond to your class 2
questions here.

For background, FIPS is basically a specific mode of operation for US
Federal agencies, and is targeted specifically to Federal procurement
mandates.  In government systems which are actually required to use FIPS
mode, you are not allowed to use any crypto services (whether from
OpenSSL or from any other device) that don't use an approved FIPS mode
of operation.  No other people actually *need* FIPS mode.  (I tend to
use it whenever I can because it tends to reduce crypto container
information leakage, and also makes it more likely that the cryptography
is correct and interoperable.)


(In the case of OpenSSL, this actually wins you very little).

Let me try to approach this from a different angle.

LEGALLY:

If you have the luxury of having more than one FIPS validated device
available to you, you probably (ask a lawyer to be absolutely sure),
can use all of them together.  However to claim FIPS compliance of the
resulting application, you must not do any cryptography outside those
devices, and it must be impossible for the FIPS-mode variant of your
application to fall back to any non-validated implementations in case
of errors etc.  Additionally you may or may not (really ask a lawyer)
be legally (not technically) required to treat any keys, passwords
etc. handed from one device to another AS IF those keys were traveling
over an insecure connection even though they never leave your process
address space on an EAL-whatever-level certified operating system on an
EAL-whatever-level certified computer.

TECHNICALLY:

If you want to combine the use of multiple FIPS validated devices,
one of which happens to be the OpenSSL FIPS cannister, and another
one a piece of hardware accessed using an OpenSSL Engine, it is an
open technical question if the FIPS-enabled OpenSSL (which is legally
outside both devices and /can/ be changed) will correctly combine use
of the OpenSSL FIPS canister with the ENGINE for accessing the hardware
device, or if it will somehow fail to do so.

For instance I am unsure what happens if the ENGINE plugin for the
FIPS validated hardware device calls back to OpenSSL for cryptographic
operations outside the scope of that device (it might do that because
that piece of hardware is also used outside USGov and the ENGINE code
was written for that case).  Will OpenSSL pass the calls to the FIPS
canister (if in FIPS mode) or use the non-validated software
implementations?

I am also unsure if the FIPS-enabled OpenSSL library allows use of
Engines when (runtime) configured in FIPS mode?

Finally /if/ it is legally required to go through additional
gymnastics when transporting parameters from one FIPS device to
another, I am unsure if the FIPS-enabled OpenSSL library will do so
when the transport is internal to OpenSSL and its ENGINE plugins.




To see the requirements of FIPS 140-2, I recommend you download the five
pieces of the specification itself from
http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsFIPS.html .  It is written in
bureaucratese, and you'll likely need several servings of alcohol to get
through it.  You should also read FIPS 200, which describes the minimum
security requirements for federal information and the systems used to
process federal information.  You'll probably want to budget several
servings of alcohol for this one, too.  Once you read these, you'll have
a much stronger understanding of how incredibly foreign the US federal
government's policy on cryptography is to the rest of society.

And remember: for US federal procurement, these are law, and the law
cannot be ignored or violated just because it would make things faster
or easier.  US government doesn't really care about how long it takes,
US government cares that it is done correctly.

-Kyle H


Both posts looks similar. I apologize  I should have clearly mentioned
these 2 posts are in different contexts.

Thanks a lot.

Regards
Jayalakshmi






Enjoy

Jakob
--
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S.  http://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2730 Herlev, Denmark.  Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Jayalakshmi bhat]

Hi Kyle,

Thanks a lot for detailed explaination, it helped me lots.

Regards
Jayalakshmi

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 2:44 AM, Kyle Hamilton aerow...@gmail.com wrote:


 On 7/5/2014 10:51 AM, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:
  Thanks a lot for the explanation. We have range of products that
  provides network connectivity.
 
  1.  On these  we would be using TPM to provide additional security.
 
  2.  On the products that are bit slow in software cryptographic
  operation, we also would be using hardware acceleration chips, that
  would do crypto operations.

 I'm going to guess that you are grouping these into class 1 (related
 to the TPM) and class 2 (related to offloading).  Since you already
 have a thread for class 1, I'll only respond to your class 2
 questions here.

 For background, FIPS is basically a specific mode of operation for US
 Federal agencies, and is targeted specifically to Federal procurement
 mandates.  In government systems which are actually required to use FIPS
 mode, you are not allowed to use any crypto services (whether from
 OpenSSL or from any other device) that don't use an approved FIPS mode
 of operation.  No other people actually *need* FIPS mode.  (I tend to
 use it whenever I can because it tends to reduce crypto container
 information leakage, and also makes it more likely that the cryptography
 is correct and interoperable.)

  In this post I wanted to know to support an hardware accelerator that
  supports FIPS enabled algorithms implemented apart from supporting the
  hardware from OpenSSL side, do we need to make changes in FIPS module
  as well.

 If I understand you correctly, you wish to alter the FIPS canister to
 offload time-consuming operations to hardware acceleration.  If this
 understanding is correct, I must regretfully inform you that it cannot
 legitimately be done.  Oh, sure, you can technically do it -- but it
 would be a modification of the black box, and require a new
 validation.  (I don't believe that such an implementation could in fact
 be validated, though I could be wrong.  I am not an expert.  But even if
 it can be, it cannot be validated with a private-label validation and
 would cost upwards of $200,000 to validate.)

 Remember, the FIPS canister *as written* is the only way to legitimately
 have FIPS mode from OpenSSL.  Once FIPS mode is set, only cryptographic
 operations which are provided by the FIPS canister can be performed, and
 only by the unmodified code within the FIPS canister.  It cannot be
 offloaded, because the FIPS canister cannot be modified to perform the
 offloading.  Also, by offloading, you change the boundaries of the
 cryptographic provider to include additional, unverified, and quite
 possibly incorrect functionality.

 To see the requirements of FIPS 140-2, I recommend you download the five
 pieces of the specification itself from
 http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsFIPS.html .  It is written in
 bureaucratese, and you'll likely need several servings of alcohol to get
 through it.  You should also read FIPS 200, which describes the minimum
 security requirements for federal information and the systems used to
 process federal information.  You'll probably want to budget several
 servings of alcohol for this one, too.  Once you read these, you'll have
 a much stronger understanding of how incredibly foreign the US federal
 government's policy on cryptography is to the rest of society.

 And remember: for US federal procurement, these are law, and the law
 cannot be ignored or violated just because it would make things faster
 or easier.  US government doesn't really care about how long it takes,
 US government cares that it is done correctly.

 -Kyle H

  Both posts looks similar. I apologize  I should have clearly mentioned
  these 2 posts are in different contexts.
 
  Thanks a lot.
 
  Regards
  Jayalakshmi

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Jayalakshmi bhat]

Hi Jakob,

Thank you very much for detailed and helpful explanation.

Regards
Jayalakshmi

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Jakob Bohm jb-open...@wisemo.com wrote:

 On 7/6/2014 10:44 AM, Kyle Hamilton wrote:


 On 7/5/2014 10:51 AM, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:

 Thanks a lot for the explanation. We have range of products that
 provides network connectivity.

 1.  On these  we would be using TPM to provide additional security.

 2.  On the products that are bit slow in software cryptographic
 operation, we also would be using hardware acceleration chips, that
 would do crypto operations.


 I'm going to guess that you are grouping these into class 1 (related
 to the TPM) and class 2 (related to offloading).  Since you already
 have a thread for class 1, I'll only respond to your class 2
 questions here.

 For background, FIPS is basically a specific mode of operation for US
 Federal agencies, and is targeted specifically to Federal procurement
 mandates.  In government systems which are actually required to use FIPS
 mode, you are not allowed to use any crypto services (whether from
 OpenSSL or from any other device) that don't use an approved FIPS mode
 of operation.  No other people actually *need* FIPS mode.  (I tend to
 use it whenever I can because it tends to reduce crypto container
 information leakage, and also makes it more likely that the cryptography
 is correct and interoperable.)

 (In the case of OpenSSL, this actually wins you very little).

 Let me try to approach this from a different angle.

 LEGALLY:

 If you have the luxury of having more than one FIPS validated device
 available to you, you probably (ask a lawyer to be absolutely sure),
 can use all of them together.  However to claim FIPS compliance of the
 resulting application, you must not do any cryptography outside those
 devices, and it must be impossible for the FIPS-mode variant of your
 application to fall back to any non-validated implementations in case
 of errors etc.  Additionally you may or may not (really ask a lawyer)
 be legally (not technically) required to treat any keys, passwords
 etc. handed from one device to another AS IF those keys were traveling
 over an insecure connection even though they never leave your process
 address space on an EAL-whatever-level certified operating system on an
 EAL-whatever-level certified computer.

 TECHNICALLY:

 If you want to combine the use of multiple FIPS validated devices,
 one of which happens to be the OpenSSL FIPS cannister, and another
 one a piece of hardware accessed using an OpenSSL Engine, it is an
 open technical question if the FIPS-enabled OpenSSL (which is legally
 outside both devices and /can/ be changed) will correctly combine use
 of the OpenSSL FIPS canister with the ENGINE for accessing the hardware
 device, or if it will somehow fail to do so.

 For instance I am unsure what happens if the ENGINE plugin for the
 FIPS validated hardware device calls back to OpenSSL for cryptographic
 operations outside the scope of that device (it might do that because
 that piece of hardware is also used outside USGov and the ENGINE code
 was written for that case).  Will OpenSSL pass the calls to the FIPS
 canister (if in FIPS mode) or use the non-validated software
 implementations?

 I am also unsure if the FIPS-enabled OpenSSL library allows use of
 Engines when (runtime) configured in FIPS mode?

 Finally /if/ it is legally required to go through additional
 gymnastics when transporting parameters from one FIPS device to
 another, I am unsure if the FIPS-enabled OpenSSL library will do so
 when the transport is internal to OpenSSL and its ENGINE plugins.




 To see the requirements of FIPS 140-2, I recommend you download the five
 pieces of the specification itself from
 http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsFIPS.html .  It is written in
 bureaucratese, and you'll likely need several servings of alcohol to get
 through it.  You should also read FIPS 200, which describes the minimum
 security requirements for federal information and the systems used to
 process federal information.  You'll probably want to budget several
 servings of alcohol for this one, too.  Once you read these, you'll have
 a much stronger understanding of how incredibly foreign the US federal
 government's policy on cryptography is to the rest of society.

 And remember: for US federal procurement, these are law, and the law
 cannot be ignored or violated just because it would make things faster
 or easier.  US government doesn't really care about how long it takes,
 US government cares that it is done correctly.

 -Kyle H

 Both posts looks similar. I apologize  I should have clearly mentioned
 these 2 posts are in different contexts.

 Thanks a lot.

 Regards
 Jayalakshmi





 Enjoy

 Jakob
 --
 Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S.  http://www.wisemo.com
 Transformervej 29, 2730 Herlev, Denmark.  Direct +45 31 13 16 10
 This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors

OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Jayalakshmi bhat]

Hi All,

We want to support a hardware accelerator on our device. We are using
OpenSSL with OpenSSL FIPS Object module. I wanted to know if we can add
engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object module.

I welcome all valuable inputs.

Regards
Jayalakshmi.

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Steve Marquess]

On 07/05/2014 02:09 AM, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:
 Hi All,
 
 We want to support a hardware accelerator on our device. We are using
 OpenSSL with OpenSSL FIPS Object module. I wanted to know if we can add
 engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object module.
 
 I welcome all valuable inputs.

First, please don't cross post to both lists. The openssl-users list
would suffice.

You've more or less asked this question already.

The OpenSSL FIPS Object Module source code is available under an open
source license, so subject to the very liberal terms of that license you
can hack that code to your hearts content.

However...

The FIPS 140-2 Level 1 validation of that module (certificate #1747) is
a different thing entirely. The instant you touch the code that
validation no longer applies.  The code without the validation is
worthless (it does nothing regular OpenSSL doesn't do better, faster,
more securely). A new validation will be necessary. You will find such a
validation a significant challenge even without the source code mods you
contemplate.

-Steve M.

-- 
Steve Marquess
OpenSSL Software Foundation, Inc.
1829 Mount Ephraim Road
Adamstown, MD  21710
USA
+1 877 673 6775 s/b
+1 301 874 2571 direct
marqu...@opensslfoundation.com
marqu...@openssl.com
gpg/pgp key: http://openssl.com/docs/0xCE69424E.asc
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Dr. Stephen Henson]

On Sat, Jul 05, 2014, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:

 Hi All,
 
 We want to support a hardware accelerator on our device. We are using
 OpenSSL with OpenSSL FIPS Object module. I wanted to know if we can add
 engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object module.
 

If you literally mean adding ENGINE support to the OpenSSL FIPS Object module
then you can but it would IMHO be a pointless exercise. The ENGINE code was
stripped out to keep the number of dependencies down in the module.

If you mean add ENGINE support to the FIPS capable OpenSSL then you don't need
to as ENGINE support is already there.

I suggest you explain exactly what you want to do.

Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Re: OpenSSL engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object Module

[Jayalakshmi bhat]

Hi Steve,

Thanks a lot for the explanation. We have range of products that provides
network connectivity.

1.  On these  we would be using TPM to provide additional security.

2.  On the products that are bit slow in software cryptographic operation,
we also would be using hardware acceleration chips, that would do crypto
operations.


In my previous post related to TPM like how to deal with Non-FIPS compliant
TPM chips, does it need any change in FIPS module size etc?

In this post I wanted to know to support an hardware accelerator that
supports FIPS enabled algorithms implemented apart from supporting the
hardware from OpenSSL side, do we need to make changes in FIPS module as
well.

Both posts looks similar. I apologize  I should have clearly mentioned
these 2 posts are in different contexts.

Thanks a lot.

Regards
Jayalakshmi


On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson st...@openssl.org
wrote:

 On Sat, Jul 05, 2014, Jayalakshmi bhat wrote:

  Hi All,
 
  We want to support a hardware accelerator on our device. We are using
  OpenSSL with OpenSSL FIPS Object module. I wanted to know if we can add
  engine support in OpenSSL FIPS Object module.
 

 If you literally mean adding ENGINE support to the OpenSSL FIPS Object
 module
 then you can but it would IMHO be a pointless exercise. The ENGINE code was
 stripped out to keep the number of dependencies down in the module.

 If you mean add ENGINE support to the FIPS capable OpenSSL then you don't
 need
 to as ENGINE support is already there.

 I suggest you explain exactly what you want to do.

 Steve.
 --
 Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
 Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
 __
 OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
 User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
 Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Re: HSM used as OpenSSL engine

[Sunjeet Singh]

Thank you for your reply Stephen.

In that is the case, then how would you explain the following phenomenon-

1. Start a SSL connection using private key stored on a HSM, protected using a 
smart-card,
2. Let the SSL connection run for a bit
3. Unplug the smart card from HSM,
4. SSL connection stops after a couple of minutes.

In my understanding, the pre-master secret is only negotiated at the beginning 
of the connection, and the private key shouldn't be used for any other 
operation during the course of the connection.

I'm interfacing the HSM to OpenSSL through the CAPI engine. Is that doing some 
magic under the covers?


Thank you,
Sunjeet


On 2012-04-13, at 6:23 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:

 On Fri, Apr 13, 2012, Sunjeet Singh wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Stupid question-
 
 If I use a HSM to store private key used for SSL connections using the 
 CryptoAPI engine for OpenSSL, is all data to be encrypted/decrypted going 
 through my HSM? I'm-
 
 1. Registering my HSM as a Cryptographic Service Provider, and 
 2. Setting my application code to initialize structural and functional 
 references to the CAPI engine and bringing up a connection using the private 
 key stored in the HSM. 
 
 Rest of the code just uses OpenSSL functions like SSL_write() and SSL_read().
 
 Since the key resides on the HSM, is data going to my HSM to get 
 encrypted/decrypted, or is there a session key being made on the HSM for 
 each SSL session that is being passed to the OS and is the OS 
 encrypting/decrypting data in memory?
 
 
 
 The CryptoAPI ENGINE only handles private key operations so your HSM is only
 used to either decrypt the premaster secret (RSA key exchange ciphersuites) or
 used to sign a DH or ECDH public key (ephemeral ciphersuites). The rest is
 handled in software using OpenSSLs cryptographic algorithm implementations.
 
 Steve.
 --
 Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
 Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
 __
 OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
 User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
 Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

HSM used as OpenSSL engine

[Sunjeet Singh]

Hi,

Stupid question-

If I use a HSM to store private key used for SSL connections using the 
CryptoAPI engine for OpenSSL, is all data to be encrypted/decrypted going 
through my HSM? I'm-

1. Registering my HSM as a Cryptographic Service Provider, and 
2. Setting my application code to initialize structural and functional 
references to the CAPI engine and bringing up a connection using the private 
key stored in the HSM. 

Rest of the code just uses OpenSSL functions like SSL_write() and SSL_read().

Since the key resides on the HSM, is data going to my HSM to get 
encrypted/decrypted, or is there a session key being made on the HSM for each 
SSL session that is being passed to the OS and is the OS encrypting/decrypting 
data in memory?


Thank you,
Sunjeet


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Re: HSM used as OpenSSL engine

[Dr. Stephen Henson]

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012, Sunjeet Singh wrote:

 Hi,
 
 Stupid question-
 
 If I use a HSM to store private key used for SSL connections using the 
 CryptoAPI engine for OpenSSL, is all data to be encrypted/decrypted going 
 through my HSM? I'm-
 
 1. Registering my HSM as a Cryptographic Service Provider, and 
 2. Setting my application code to initialize structural and functional 
 references to the CAPI engine and bringing up a connection using the private 
 key stored in the HSM. 
 
 Rest of the code just uses OpenSSL functions like SSL_write() and SSL_read().
 
 Since the key resides on the HSM, is data going to my HSM to get 
 encrypted/decrypted, or is there a session key being made on the HSM for each 
 SSL session that is being passed to the OS and is the OS 
 encrypting/decrypting data in memory?
 
 

The CryptoAPI ENGINE only handles private key operations so your HSM is only
used to either decrypt the premaster secret (RSA key exchange ciphersuites) or
used to sign a DH or ECDH public key (ephemeral ciphersuites). The rest is
handled in software using OpenSSLs cryptographic algorithm implementations.

Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Looking for information on creating an openssl engine

[Jim Segrave]

Is there any sort of a guide as to what is needed to create an openssl
engine?

It's not clear to me what interface needs to be provided nor exactly
what functionality can be moved to an engine.

I have an idea I'd like to experiment with for an approach to
parallelising encryption/decryption (using existing algorithms, such as
the various sizes of AES). I'm thinking about how I could multi-thread
the encryption, but I don't know if it's possible to do what I'm
thinking about as a pluggable option,

For example, assuming I wanted to use AES-256 CBC or CFB, I'd like to
use the existing openssl code as much as possible without changes, so
establishment of sessions, key agreement, etc, use the existing code.
I'd want to only supply the block level encryption/decryption once the
keys and cipher had been agreed, at which point, block encrypt/decrypt
would pass through code I'd supply via the engine. Things such as
re-negotiation of keys, message authentication, seesion termination, etc
I'd want to use the existing code rather than attempt to roll my own,
particularly since I'm thinking of doing a proof-of-concept and it's not
impossible that my somewhat hazy ideas arem't actully workable.

Can the pluggable engine be used to provide such a limited
interface/extention to openssl? I'd only handle the IV and supply block
encrypt/decrypt. Does this actually fit the engine interface or is an
engine expected at a minimum to provide more than just this rather
limited functionality?

For anyone who is curious, my interest was sparked by seeing performance
problems on some hardware - Sun T52xx servers for example, which have
rather limited CPU power, but compensate by having lots of CPUs with
support for lots of threads. I've been musing over an idea how to get
the block encryption/decryption broken out so that  individual blocks
can be en/decrypted in separate threads, then marshalled back into a
single stream again.


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

OpenSSL Engine - configurable ciphers/digests

[com...@gmx.ch]

Hi,


I need some help with a special case: a dynamic engine with non-static 
or configureable ciphers.



While I do not use cryptodev, the code provides a good example of the 
intial problem:

http://cvs.openssl.org/fileview?f=openssl/crypto/engine/eng_cryptodev.cv=1.23

I basically have it working, but there is a problem, during the first 
call to af_alg_ciphers() I have to list all ciphers the engine *could* 
support or none, as af_alg_ctrl() gets called later.
If I respond with all ciphers, OpenSSL will assume I support all of 
them, and bail out unfriendly if told later on a given cipher is not 
supported in af_alg_ciphers().
If I claim there are no supported ciphers during this initital call to 
af_alg_ciphers(), the auto-engine loading feature via openssl.cnf does 
not work and software using openssl may require modifications to use the 
engine.


The code and instructions for my engine is available here:
http://src.carnivore.it/users/common/af_alg/

The comments for cryptodev_usable_ciphers and cryptodev_usable_digests 
show there is a demand for a way to configure the ciphers/digests run by 
the particular engine.

How to do it properly?

I want this to be a runtime option, not a compile time option.


MfG
Markus
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Re: Openssl Engine for Utimaco CryptoServer

[Ralf Hornik Mailings]

Ralf Hornik Mailings r...@best.homeunix.org wrote:


[Success]: SO_PATH:/usr/lib/engines/engine_pkcs11.so
[Failure]: MODULE_PATH:/opt/cserver/lib/libcs2_pkcs11.so
7104:error:260AC089:engine routines:INT_CTRL_HELPER:invalid cmd  
name:eng_ctrl.c:134:

7104:error:260AB089:engine routines:ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string:invalid


What does INT_CTRL_HELPER:invalid cmd name mean? As mentioned in  
documentation the cmd_name has to be set to SO_PATH. So cmd_name set  
to MODULE_NAME will always fail. Is that a bug?

Regards

Ralf


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Openssl Engine for Utimaco CryptoServer

[Ralf Hornik Mailings]

Hello List,

is there any working engine for Utimaco CryptoServer?

Using Utimacos libcs2_pkcs11.so and OpenSCs pkcs11-tool it is possible  
to import and/or generate keys on the HSM but trying the openSC's  
engine for openssl I get:


modrow:~# openssl engine -t dynamic -pre  
SO_PATH:/usr/lib/engines/engine_pkcs11.so  -pre  
MODULE_PATH:/opt/cserver/lib/libcs2_pkcs11.so  -pre LIST_ADD:1 -pre LOAD

(dynamic) Dynamic engine loading support
[Success]: SO_PATH:/usr/lib/engines/engine_pkcs11.so
[Failure]: MODULE_PATH:/opt/cserver/lib/libcs2_pkcs11.so
7104:error:260AC089:engine routines:INT_CTRL_HELPER:invalid cmd  
name:eng_ctrl.c:134:
7104:error:260AB089:engine routines:ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string:invalid cmd  
name:eng_ctrl.c:316:

[Success]: LIST_ADD:1
[Success]: LOAD
Loaded: (pkcs11) pkcs11 engine
unable to load module (null)
 [ unavailable ]

Has anybody a working openssl-engine for CryptoServer?
Thanks and best regards

Ralf


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Openssl Engine Performance Benchmarks

[Shasi Thati]

Hi,

I have a question regarding the openssl speed command. When I use this
command to test the crypto offload engine performance  what is the right
command to use?

Is it

openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -engine xx -elapsed

or

openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -engine xx

I have seen examples with both of them on the internet and I get different
results with each of them. What exactly does elapsed option  add here?

Thanks,

Shasi

RE: Openssl Engine Performance Benchmarks

[David Schwartz]

 Is it 
 openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -engine xx -elapsed 
 or
 openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -engine xx

It depends what you want to measure.

 I have seen examples with both of them on the internet and I get
 different results with each of them. What exactly does elapsed
 option add here?

-elapsedmeasure time in real time instead of CPU user time.

So, do you want to know which one is faster or which one uses less CPU?

DS


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

Re: Openssl Engine Performance Benchmarks

[Geoff Thorpe]

On Tuesday 31 March 2009 23:16:10 Shasi Thati wrote:
 Hi,

 I have a question regarding the openssl speed command. When I use this
 command to test the crypto offload engine performance  what is the
 right command to use?

 Is it

 openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -engine xx -elapsed

 or

 openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -engine xx

 I have seen examples with both of them on the internet and I get
 different results with each of them. What exactly does elapsed
 option  add here?

It means elapsed. :-) Ie. how much time elapsed during the benchmark. 
The normal measurement is cpu usage, which is something less than or 
equal to the elapsed time - if the benchmark used half the available cpu 
cycles during the elapsed period (according to scheduler stats, accurate 
or otherwise), the time given would be half the elapsed time.

The usefulness of using cpu-time (instead of -elapsed) is to eliminate;
(a) skewed statistics due to the system running other tasks while the 
benchmark was in progress (ie. you're only billed for what you use), and
(b) to eliminate time the s/w (and driver) spent waiting for the crypto 
accelerator to respond to crypto operations.
The value of (b) is to interpolate certain theoretical limits. Ie. if 80% 
of the time is spent waiting on the accelerator, the cpu-time for the 
benchmark run would be 1/5 of the elapsed time and so the calculated 
number of crypto ops per second would be 5 times what actually happened 
in real/elapsed time. If the latency of the accelerator is roughly 
constant but it can process multiple things at once due to having 
multiple execution units, then this inflated number is a 
useful estimate of how much you could theoretically process if you had 
multiple threads/processes keeping the cpu busy rather than waiting. In 
this example you'd need at least 5 threads to achieve such a performance 
level. (Which also assumes the accelerator performance would continue to 
scale up that far.)

Cheers,
Geoff

-- 
Un terrien, c'est un singe avec des clefs de char...
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

FYI: OpenSSL engine. Cell / Playstation 3.

[Neil Costigan]

Hi all,

I was asked to forward this to the list.



I've been working on an OpenSSL engine to support the Cell processor's
(Playstation 3 etc.) vector processors (SPU's)

I've (finally!) got a rough version glued together using the IBM
multi-precision library from the Cell SDK.

You may be interested in the results of version  ***0.001.


bottom line is 47 * 4096bit RSA sign/sec as opposed to 11 per without.


 ./apps/openssl speed rsa4096 -engine cellspumpm -elapsed -multi 15

(see [2] below for openssl build options)


This is with 15 Multi processes and elapsed time. The choice of 15 is
random.


with SPU engine : -
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.020915s 0.000546s 47.8   1832.2


'raw' OpenSSL  (same build)
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.091103s 0.001213s 11.0824.7




Without the -multi option.


with SPU engine : -
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.098480s 0.001725s 10.2579.7


'raw' OpenSSL  (same build)
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.108516s 0.001742s  9.2574.1





Note:


- Results are from a 3.2 GHz Playstation 3 with 7 SPUs running yellow
dog linux 5.0. [1]
A server/blade Cell system would have up to 16 SPUs.

- I'm using elapsed time on a relatively quite machine. It still has SSH
and X server connections running. I'll be able to get this down later.
The multi-threaded nature of the system messes up the CPU timing option.

- This is first cut with a basic a mod_exp(). Further optimisations
maybe possible with pre-computation and different window sizes.

- There are overheads with the current DMA transfer of parameters that
will be erased as I optimise the big number conversion code and
introduce double buffering techniques. But overheads are pretty small
compared to the mod_exp(). I'm also pretty hopeful that a MIRACL version
I am working on will be even faster.

- I still have an intermittent PKCS#1 padding problems. (arrraggg)

- See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_microprocessor for more details
on the Cell

- The Cell PPU is a PowerPC G5.  OpenSSL is configured for PPC/G5 ASM at
64-bit.

- The Cell SPU can be viewed as a co-processor with 270K RAM with
restricted I/O but enhancements for accelerated multimedia or number
crunching. It does not directly interact with the main system memory.

- The engine is based upon the GMP engine shipped with OpenSSL but uses
the vector optimised IBM MPM multi-precision library on the SPUs for the
big number operations.
The speed gains are attributed to the SPU's 128bit registers and
specialist vector operations allowing for multiple 32bit integer
operations in fewer clock cycles


I'd like to thank Augusto Jun Devegili (DCU/Ireland   unicamp,
Brazil),  Dr Mike Scott (DCU, Ireland) , and Dr Stephen Henson (OpenSSL)
for their assistance and patience.

I hope to announce a public/release version later this month.

Any comments, questions,  etc. to neil.costigan[at]computing.dcu.ie

Regards,


Neil Costigan

School of Computing,

Dublin City University,

Dublin, IRELAND.

http://www.computing.dcu.ie/~ncostiga
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

FYI: OpenSSL engine. Cell / Playstation 3.

[Neil Costigan]

Hi all,

I was asked to forward this to the list.



I've been working on an OpenSSL engine to support the Cell processor's
(Playstation 3 etc.) vector processors (SPU's)

I've (finally!) got a rough version glued together using the IBM
multi-precision library from the Cell SDK.

You may be interested in the results of version  ***0.001.


bottom line is 47 * 4096bit RSA sign/sec as opposed to 11 per without.


 ./apps/openssl speed rsa4096 -engine cellspumpm -elapsed -multi 15

(see [2] below for openssl build options)


This is with 15 Multi processes and elapsed time. The choice of 15 is
random.


with SPU engine : -
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.020915s 0.000546s 47.8   1832.2


'raw' OpenSSL  (same build)
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.091103s 0.001213s 11.0824.7




Without the -multi option.


with SPU engine : -
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.098480s 0.001725s 10.2579.7


'raw' OpenSSL  (same build)
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.108516s 0.001742s  9.2574.1





Note:


- Results are from a 3.2 GHz Playstation 3 with 7 SPUs running yellow
dog linux 5.0. [1]
A server/blade Cell system would have up to 16 SPUs.

- I'm using elapsed time on a relatively quite machine. It still has SSH
and X server connections running. I'll be able to get this down later.
The multi-threaded nature of the system messes up the CPU timing option.

- This is first cut with a basic a mod_exp(). Further optimisations
maybe possible with pre-computation and different window sizes.

- There are overheads with the current DMA transfer of parameters that
will be erased as I optimise the big number conversion code and
introduce double buffering techniques. But overheads are pretty small
compared to the mod_exp(). I'm also pretty hopeful that a MIRACL version
I am working on will be even faster.

- I still have an intermittent PKCS#1 padding problems. (arrraggg)

- See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_microprocessor for more details
on the Cell

- The Cell PPU is a PowerPC G5.  OpenSSL is configured for PPC/G5 ASM at
64-bit.

- The Cell SPU can be viewed as a co-processor with 270K RAM with
restricted I/O but enhancements for accelerated multimedia or number
crunching. It does not directly interact with the main system memory.

- The engine is based upon the GMP engine shipped with OpenSSL but uses
the vector optimised IBM MPM multi-precision library on the SPUs for the
big number operations.
The speed gains are attributed to the SPU's 128bit registers and
specialist vector operations allowing for multiple 32bit integer
operations in fewer clock cycles


I'd like to thank Augusto Jun Devegili (DCU/Ireland   unicamp,
Brazil),  Dr Mike Scott (DCU, Ireland) , and Dr Stephen Henson (OpenSSL) 
for their assistance and patience.

I hope to announce a public/release version later this month.

Any comments, questions,  etc. to neil.costigan[at]computing.dcu.ie

Regards,


Neil Costigan

School of Computing,

Dublin City University,

Dublin, IRELAND.

http://www.computing.dcu.ie/~ncostiga


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Problems with OpenSSL Engine and hashing.

[Marco GRELLA]

Hello everybody,
I have a problem in making our OpenSSL Engine that drives our HW
accelerator work fine for hash (SHA1 in particular).
The problem seems to be related to my Digest_Copy or (less likely)
Digest_Cleanup implementation (I'll explain this further on).
The Engine works fine for the Cipher algorithms (both just operating on
a file and using s_client/s_server), and works fine for SHA1 when
operating on a file.
Trying to run an s_client / s_server session, I noticed that multiple
context are used and the calls to Digest_Update function are mixed, so
I have to maintain coherency in some way.

- 1 -
The easiest (and quickest) way to do this is to buffer the data that I
receive at each call to Digest_Update, for each context, and ask for a
real hash operation only when I receive the Digest_Final for that context.
Doing in this way, everything is ok, both operating on a single file
(here only one context is used) and using s_client / s_server (multiple
contexts).
In this scenario, in the Digest_Copy function I make a memcopy of
the EVP_MD_CTX-md_data field where our data structure sits, and
moreover I manually allocate and copy the buffer in which I am keeping
the stored data.
In the Digest_Cleanup I make a free of the buffer in which I keep
the data (it is dynamically allocated) and I set to zero the counters
used to keep track of its size and actual occupation.
In this way, as I said, everything works.

- 2 -
The previous solution is mainly a workaround and has a big disadvantage
if you want to hash large files or amount of data. So I decided to use
the capability of our HW accelerator to save and restore the current
context of the hash block. Here I have some problem, when using
s_client/ s_server. Even if I implement it in the most trivial and
inefficient way (RESTORE/UPDATE/SAVE at *each* call to update) it does
not work.
In this scenario, we have a buffer for the context in our data
structure. I allocate this buffer at the first call to Digest_Update,
obviously not setting the RESTORE flag for this first call.
I call free for this buffer and put it to NULL in the Digest_Cleanup
function and, if this buffer is valid (not null) I copy it in the
Digest_Copy function, by allocating a proper memory area in the to
context.
If I use this solution on a single file, it works, so the SAVE/RESTORE
mechanism works fine (and it has been proved elsewhere). But it fails in
the s_client/s_server test. As the main difference is that here the
Digest_Copy and Digest_Cleanup function are called, I suppose the
problem is here, even if I do not see many differences with the scenario
number -1-

What am I missing?
Could you help me?
Can someone point me to some useful resource or describe me exactly what
has to be implemented in the Digest_Copy (and Digest_Cleanup) function?
Or do you know another way to avoid the problem of mixed context? I mean:
sha1_init(ctx_A)
sha1_update(ctx_A)
sha1_init(ctx_B)
sha1_update(ctx_B)
sha1_update(ctx_A)

Thank you very much and best regards,
Marco Grella
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Openssl Engine calling code (soft pkcs11) also written in openssl conflict

[Nils Larsch]

Christopher Nebergall wrote:

I've been working with some patches to curl I found on the curl mailing
list to support openssl and opensc's engine_pkcs11.  

Basically it consists of 


Curl 7.14 + patch which adds dynamic engine support - opensc-20050826
[engine_pkcs11.so] - soft-pkcs11 1.2 


on

Ubuntu Linux (5.04) Kernel 2.6.10-5-386 


actually the openssl version would be more interesting



The problem is that engine_pkcs11 from opensc registers custom rsa
functions for its purposes.  They dlopen a pkcs11 library in my case
soft-pkcs11 which is also implemented using openssl.  The problem is
that the soft token seems to be calling the rsa functions registered by
opensc and not the original versions.  I need some advice or background
on overriding crypto implementations to figure out how to make
soft-pkcs11 not inherit the opensc's overridden functions. 


you could use RSA_set_method with RSA_PKCS1_SSLeay for example


I would have
thought since soft-pkcs11 was dlopened that this wouldn't have inherited
the modified functions.  


the default engine is a global parameter

Nils
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Openssl Engine calling code (soft pkcs11) also written in openssl conflict

[Christopher Nebergall]

I've been working with some patches to curl I found on the curl mailing
list to support openssl and opensc's engine_pkcs11.  

Basically it consists of 

Curl 7.14 + patch which adds dynamic engine support - opensc-20050826
[engine_pkcs11.so] - soft-pkcs11 1.2 

on

Ubuntu Linux (5.04) Kernel 2.6.10-5-386 

The problem is that engine_pkcs11 from opensc registers custom rsa
functions for its purposes.  They dlopen a pkcs11 library in my case
soft-pkcs11 which is also implemented using openssl.  The problem is
that the soft token seems to be calling the rsa functions registered by
opensc and not the original versions.  I need some advice or background
on overriding crypto implementations to figure out how to make
soft-pkcs11 not inherit the opensc's overridden functions. I would have
thought since soft-pkcs11 was dlopened that this wouldn't have inherited
the modified functions.  

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

what's the default openssl engine

[hao chen]

Hi,

I always heard that the openssl uses the default
openssl engine if the engine is not specified. I would
like to know what's the default openssl engine. In
another word, how could I tell which is the default
openssl engine when I use openssl?

thanks
hao

Best Regard

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

openssl / engine / atalla

[Jean-Paul VILLETTE]

hi,
does someone have an example of an openssl.cnf file to configure an SSL 
accelerator like an ATALLA board ?

JPV
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Triple-des with openssl engine and ncypher hardware.

[Frederic DONNAT]

Hi,

We (Zencod) have written some code for symetric crypto use with openssl
0.9.7.
You may look at our contribution on openssl web site or in th demo
subdirectory.

Hope it will help.

Fred


-Original Message-
From:   sebastien Labrune [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Wed 11/20/2002 5:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 
Subject:Triple-des with openssl engine and ncypher hardware.

Hi,

I'm trying to integrate ncipher hardware (nshield) with openssl.
I want to implement triple-des with internal keys. I've seen that we can
access the chil engine with the new openssl engine. How can i use it to
encrypt data with triple-des algorithm and keys stored in hardware?

Is it possible to perform it with internal keys? How?
The only functions i've seen in C API, are using des_key_schedule structure
type that is to say that we must have an access to the keys.

Regards.




winmail.dat

Triple-des with openssl engine and ncypher hardware.

[sebastien Labrune]

Hi,

I'm trying to integrate ncipher hardware (nshield) 
with openssl.I want to implement triple-des with internal keys. I've seen 
that we can access the "chil" engine with the new openssl engine. How can i use 
it to encrypt data with triple-des algorithm and keys stored in 
hardware?

Is it possible to perform it with internal keys? 
How?The only functions i've seen in C API, are using des_key_schedule 
structure type that is to say that we must have an access to the 
keys.

Regards.

OpenSSL engine NFast

[Michiels Olivier]

Hi,
I'm trying to uderstand how the engine object is working with 
openssl-engine.
I'm using a NFast crypto device (chil) and when I look into hw_ncipher.c 
I found three interristing functions:

static int hwcrhk_insert_card(const char *prompt_info,
const char *wrong_info,
HWCryptoHook_PassphraseContext *ppctx,
HWCryptoHook_CallerContext *cactx);
static int hwcrhk_get_pass(const char *prompt_info,
int *len_io, char *buf,
HWCryptoHook_PassphraseContext *ppctx,
HWCryptoHook_CallerContext *cactx);
static void hwcrhk_log_message(void *logstr, const char *message);

How can I use them ? They are all static. I found that they are in the 
HWCryptoHook_InitInfo hwcrhk_globals structure but how can I have access 
to this structure ?
Is the process of the engine call them automatically or do I have to 
specify somewhere when I want the user to enter a physical token ?

Thanks for your help,

Michiels Olivier

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Openssl Engine

[Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker]

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:55:53 +0200, 
Michiels Olivier [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

olivier.michiels Hi,
olivier.michiels Currently I've an application that creates keys, certificate 
requests 
olivier.michiels and certificates using NFast and openssl-0.9.5.
olivier.michiels I've updated my code to use the openssl-engine.
olivier.michiels Everything works perferctly with some modifications.
olivier.michiels Now, I would like to use the ENGINE concept with my NFast.
olivier.michiels I've already understood that the identifier of my ENGINE is chil and 
olivier.michiels I've wrote some code to test if I can have a new pointer to a ENGINE 
olivier.michiels structure.
olivier.michiels What I would like to know is how to use this ENGINE pointer with my 
olivier.michiels existing code, for example, what are the commands available for the 
olivier.michiels NFAST. I've tried this little code but it doesn't work.
olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels #include openssl/engine.h
olivier.michiels #include openssl/bio.h
olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels int main(int argc,char* argv[])
olivier.michiels {
olivier.michiels ENGINE *e;
olivier.michiels BIO *err;
olivier.michiels

It would be a good thing to insert a call to ERR_load_crypto_strings()
here, so the errors get displayed with humanly readable reasons
instead of all those numbers.

olivier.michiels ENGINE_load_builtin_engines();
olivier.michiels if ((e = ENGINE_by_id(argv[1])) == NULL)
olivier.michiels {
olivier.michiels fprintf(stderr,Error for: %s\n,argv[1]);
olivier.michiels return -1;
olivier.michiels }
olivier.michiels
olivier.michiels err = BIO_new_fp(stderr,BIO_NOCLOSE);
olivier.michiels if(!ENGINE_set_default(e, ENGINE_METHOD_ALL))
olivier.michiels {
olivier.michiels BIO_printf(err,can't use that engine\n);
olivier.michiels ERR_print_errors(err);
olivier.michiels ENGINE_free(e);
olivier.michiels return -1;
olivier.michiels }
olivier.michiels BIO_printf(err,engine \%s\ set.\n, ENGINE_get_id(e));
olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels if (ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string(e,get_passphrase,Password:,0) == 
0)
olivier.michiels {
olivier.michiels ERR_print_errors(err);
olivier.michiels ENGINE_free(e);
olivier.michiels return -1;
olivier.michiels }

And exactly what was that supposed to accomplish?

olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels /* Free our structural reference. */
olivier.michiels ENGINE_free(e);
olivier.michiels
olivier.michiels return 0;
olivier.michiels }
olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels The output is has follows:
olivier.michiels engine chil set.
olivier.michiels 25983:error:260AC089:engine 
routines:func(172):reason(137):eng_ctrl.c:136:
olivier.michiels 25983:error:260AB089:engine 
routines:func(171):reason(137):eng_ctrl.c:314:
olivier.michiels 
olivier.michiels I need to ask passwords in order to have my NFast working.
olivier.michiels How can I do that ?

No, you don't need to ask for passwords at the OpenSSL level.  They
will be prompted for automatically when needed.

-- 
Richard Levitte   \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken  \ S-168 35  BROMMA  \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\  SWEDEN   \ or +46-708-26 53 44
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/

Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Openssl Engine

[Michiels Olivier]

Hi,
Currently I've an application that creates keys, certificate requests 
and certificates using NFast and openssl-0.9.5.
I've updated my code to use the openssl-engine.
Everything works perferctly with some modifications.
Now, I would like to use the ENGINE concept with my NFast.
I've already understood that the identifier of my ENGINE is chil and 
I've wrote some code to test if I can have a new pointer to a ENGINE 
structure.
What I would like to know is how to use this ENGINE pointer with my 
existing code, for example, what are the commands available for the 
NFAST. I've tried this little code but it doesn't work.

#include openssl/engine.h
#include openssl/bio.h

int main(int argc,char* argv[])
{
ENGINE *e;
BIO *err;
   
ENGINE_load_builtin_engines();
if ((e = ENGINE_by_id(argv[1])) == NULL)
{
fprintf(stderr,Error for: %s\n,argv[1]);
return -1;
}
   
err = BIO_new_fp(stderr,BIO_NOCLOSE);
if(!ENGINE_set_default(e, ENGINE_METHOD_ALL))
{
BIO_printf(err,can't use that engine\n);
ERR_print_errors(err);
ENGINE_free(e);
return -1;
}
BIO_printf(err,engine \%s\ set.\n, ENGINE_get_id(e));


if (ENGINE_ctrl_cmd_string(e,get_passphrase,Password:,0) == 0)
{
ERR_print_errors(err);
ENGINE_free(e);
return -1;
}

/* Free our structural reference. */
ENGINE_free(e);
   
return 0;
}

The output is has follows:
engine chil set.
25983:error:260AC089:engine routines:func(172):reason(137):eng_ctrl.c:136:
25983:error:260AB089:engine routines:func(171):reason(137):eng_ctrl.c:314:

I need to ask passwords in order to have my NFast working.
How can I do that ?

Thanks

Michiels Olivier

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Using ENGINE in openssl-engine-0.9.6g

[Lynn Gazis]

I ran the openssl speed test with OpenSSL 0.9.6g with the CryptoSwift engine
on Windows, and found that it worked OK; I didn't test further than speed
-engine cswift rsa1024.

Lynn Gazis

-Original Message-
From: Edward Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 10:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Using ENGINE in openssl-engine-0.9.6g


Hi there,

Has anybody had any problems using the ENGINE API's in
openssl-engine-0.9.6g on Windows.  I downloaded
openssl-engine-0.9.6g and built it.  No errors were
encountered during build.  I have the following dll's
built, libeay32.dll and ssleay32.dll.

In my code, I try to call ENGINE_by_id().  But a
dialog pops up that says The ordinal 2493 could not
be located in the dynamic link library LIBEAY32.dll.

When I right click on the LIBEAY32.dll and choose
view dependencies, I do see the ordinal 2493 (which
corresponds to ENGINE_by_id()).

Does anybody know what's up?  Other stuff works
though.  My client is able to connect to my server. 
The SSL handshaking appears to be ok.  Data is read
and written ok.  But if I enable the ENGINE code, then
I get this error.

Ed

__
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RE : openssl engine use

[Geoff Thorpe]

Hey there,

On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Frederic DONNAT wrote:

 A sample of programming with engine is mod-ssl (initialize ENGINE before
 everything else). You can also see apps directory of OpenSSL s_client,
 s_server ... files

 Be also carefull between openssl-engine-0.9.6x and openssl-0.9.7 there
 is some diff for engine use.
[snip]
 -Message d'origine-
 De : Rob McMonigal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[snip]
 I like to know how difficult it would be to have an existing application that
 uses openssl to be converted over to use the engine version openssl and the
 hardware accelerator functions.  I cannot find any information on programming
 openssl with hardware accelerators.  Any help would be appreciated.
[snip]

I'm also in the process of rejigging mistakes in the 0.9.7-dev
documentation (it wasn't adjusted to constification and ENGINEification
changes for RSA/DSA/DH/etc...) and at the same time have a monster
engine.pod in progress that I intend to include before the next 0.9.7
beta. That man page may sound terrifying (and no, I haven't split it out
to provide API documentation per-function), but at least it'll be better
than zero documentation. Hopefully.

Failing that - take a read of engine.h (it's relatively well
self-documented) and check out the source that Frederic suggested.

Cheers,
Geoff

-- 
Geoff Thorpe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

rsa GenerateKey in openssl engine

[afchine madjlessi]

Hello 
everybody,We are implementing an new engine (based on openssl 0.9.6c) to use 
the RSAPKCS11 interface of our crypto hardware (Bull Trustway 
CC2000).We would like to access our C_GenerateKeyPair PKCS11 function 
through theopenssl RSA_generate_key.So we are adding a new entry gen_key 
in the RSA method to call our trustwayengine to do that.That way the 
genrsa command will call the hardware to generate rsapublic/private key 
pair.Is it the good way? If yes, do you plan to add this functionality in 
the0.9.7 release.Thanks and RegardsafchineBull Trustway R 
 D[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: openssl openssl-engine

[Paul Allen]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 I write from Italy, and I'd like to use openssl and I would want to know which 
differences are between openssl and openssl-engine.

The openssl-engine version contains support for hardware crypto
devices.  You can use either version for regular SSL functionality.

Paul Allen

-- 
Boeing Phantom Works   \ Paul L. Allen, (425) 865-3297
Math  Computing Technology  \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
POB 3707 M/S 7L-40, Seattle, WA 98124-2207 \ Prototype Systems Group
 S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

openssl engine?

[Helmut Heilig]

Hi,

can anybody tell me the difference between openssl and openssl-engine.
Couldn't find anything about that in the FAQ.

I am not subscribed. Please give me a cc.

Regards

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: openssl engine?

[Richard Koenning]

At 20:33 12.10.2001 +0200, Helmut Heilig wrote:
can anybody tell me the difference between openssl and openssl-engine.
Couldn't find anything about that in the FAQ.

See: http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html

[MISC] 6. What is an 'engine' version?

Ciao,
Richard
-- 
Dr. Richard W. Könning
Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH, EP LP COM 5
Phone/Fax: +49-89-636-47852 / 47655
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: How I can use Cryptoswitf device with openssl engine 0.9.6 ?

[lgazis]

Are 
you at OpenSSL engine 0.9.6 or 0.9.6b? There were some fixes to the engine 
code between 0.9.6 and 0.9.6b which will be relevant to you if you are on 
FreeBSD, AIX, or HP UX (particularly HP UX, but FreeBSD and AIX do require some 
extra options to be passed to config, at version 0.9.6, for the engine DSO code 
to work properly).

I have 
some instructions which I can email you, but, due to the fixes I mentioned, I 
have slightly different versions of the instructions depending on whether you 
are using 0.9.6 or 0.9.6a/0.9.6b (the fixes got applied in 0.9.6a, so there is 
no change in what you need to do between 0.9.6a and 0.9.6b).

You 
can also email our Technical Support in France ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for 
assistance from someone in your own time zone in getting your CryptoSwift device 
working with OpenSSL.

Lynn 
Gazis
Rainbow Technologies

  -Original Message-From: Patrick FRAIZ 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 
  3:10 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: How I can 
  use Cryptoswitf device with openssl engine 0.9.6 ?
  Thanks,
  
  Patrick FRAIZPhone 33 (0)1 55 63 42 28Fax 
  33 (0)1 55 63 54 01ADP-GSI 148, rue Anatole France92688 
  Levallois-Perret Cedex - France

openssl-engine+cryptoswift

[Bahram BASSIRI]

Hello,

I would like if anybody have a patch for cryptosiwft HSM  with
openssl-engine like load-private-key

Thanks

Bahram BASSIRI
OMNICERTIS
3 bis rue cité Bergère 75009 Paris
Tél direct + 33 1 44 83 88 25
Tél général + 33 1 44 83 88 10
Fax + 33 1 44 83 88 29
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.omnicertis.net
 

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Does openSSL-Engine offload both the Handshake and Bulk crypto tasks

[Venkatesan, Ganesh]

Hi:

Could you help me answer this question? I was not able to conclude one way
or the other by browsing the source (crypto/engine/vendor-defns). Which
piece of code would I look to see how the offload is performed?

Thanks,
ganesh.
___
Ganesh Venkatesan
LAN Access Division/Platform Networking Group
Intel Corp.  M/S JF3-410 ' 503.264.0637
2111 NE 25th Avenue  Fax   503.264.9903
Hillsboro, OR  97124-6497*   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__



__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

AW: n-cipher does not work with openssl-engine-0.9.6a

[Schwiete, Ralf]

Hello,

after I grep the whole include/ssl directory in the source-tree I had found
it.

Thankyou

 
 Use chil instead of ncipher.  The reason for this is that the
 interface used is called CHIL (C{something} Hardware Interface
 Library, IIRC, but nCipher folks will most probably have to correct
 me), which nCipher has tried to deploy as a standard interface for
 hadware access.
 
 -- 


-- 
Ralf Schwiete
Dresdner Global IT Services
Tel.:   +49 69 263 52224
e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

NT-build of OpenSSL engine 0.9.6a

[Wolfgang Bachmann]

Hi, I've stumbled over two problems with building the OpenSSL engine
0.9.6a for Windows-NT:

1) It automatically adds the advapi32-library to the libs.

While this is probably fine when building a DLL, you'll get problems
(dupliate symbols) when using a statically linked OpenSSL.

Fix: remove it from the perl script in util/pl/VC_32.pl:
115c115
   $ex =' ';
---
   $ex =' advapi32.lib';

2) the file crypto/bio/b_print.c has a too naive view about the
availability of 64-bit integral data types.

It first has the rather good idea of letting bn.h decide whether 64-bit
longs are supported (line 75), but if BN_LLONG is defined, it
automatically assumes that "long long" is the correct type instead of
special-casing for NT's __int64 (yuck!) like bn.h does.

I don't know whether b_print.c actually needs the type to be signed, but
if an unsigned will do, I'd suggest simply using the BN_ULLONG type.
Anyone knows this ?

If b_print.c insists on having a signed data type, what about not just
defining BN_LLONG without a value, but with the value "long long" or, in
the case of NT, with "__int64", so that b_print.c can use that one.
Would there be any side effects ?

Anyway it'd be nice if these problems would be fixed in an upcoming
release... :-)

cheers, Wolfgang
-- 

Wolfgang Bachmann   E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZOSO Forschungsges.m.b.H.   Phone: (++43) 3127 20900  
Friesachstrasse 15  Fax:   (++43) 3127 20900-24
A-8114 Stuebing - Austria   http://www.zoso.at 

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: What is OpenSSL Engine ?

[Steven A. Bade]

the engine is a design architecture to allow the use of hardware crypto devices
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 10:10:20AM -0500, Aslam wrote:
 Hi,
 
 What exactly is the difference between a OpenSSL and OpenSSL Engine ?
 
 
 Thanks
 
 Aslam
 
 __
 OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
 User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Steven A. Bade
AIX E-Commerce/Network Security Cryptographic Strategy and Development Architecture
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
T/L 678-4799
(512)-838-4799

--
To convert from Hogsheads to Cubic Feet - Multiply by 8.4219

"Two-way communication is necessary to proactively facilitate acceptance
and involvement and to get insights about the journey it takes to get where
we want"


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17 Sol aris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board

[De Taeye, Herman]

Thanks for the diagnostic program. With the delivery by Sun an other program
called cstest located in /opt/SUNWconn/sunsecure/vts/bin.  This program has
other options, but finally returns similar output.  
csdiag showed that when running openssl speed rsa1024 -engine cswift, the
card processed 1440 requests.
During the test it comes up with an error :

# openssl speed rsa1024 -engine cswift
engine "cswift" set.
Doing 1024 bit private rsa's for 10s: RSA sign failure
17338:error:26067072:engine routines:CSWIFT_MOD_EXP_CRT:request
failed:hw_cswift
.c:524:CryptoSwift error number is -10004
1 1024 bit private RSA's in 0.29s
Doing 1024 bit public rsa's for 10s: RSA verify failure
17338:error:26066072:engine routines:CSWIFT_MOD_EXP:request
failed:hw_cswift.c:4
13:CryptoSwift error number is -10004
1 1024 bit public RSA's in 0.67s
OpenSSL 0.9.6 [engine] 24 Sep 2000
built on: Wed Feb 21 15:15:24 MET 2001
options:bn(64,32) md2(int) rc4(ptr,char) des(idx,cisc,16,long) idea(int)
blowfis
h(ptr) 
compiler: gcc -fPIC -DTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H
-mcpu=ultr
asparc -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall -DB_ENDIAN -DBN_DIV2W -DULTRASPARC
-DMD5_A
SM
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 1024 bits   0.2900s   0.6700s  3.4  1.5
For this problem I had opened an other contact.

When installing openssl and configuring Apache.1.3.17, all seems to be OK.
Thanks to you all for the prompt support in trying to solve my problem. 

Best regards,

Herman De Taeye
Unisys Belgium.


-Original Message-
From: lgazis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 4:30 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; De Taeye, Herman
Subject: RE: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17 Sol
aris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board

1) csdiag -a 0
2) Run your test.
3) csdiag -a 0

If the interrupts haven't gone up by more than a couple, then the card isn't
being accessed (in which case, I'd suggest following John Airey's advice
about SSL_EXPERIMENTAL and SSLCryptoDevice, or you can email
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for help).

Lynn Gazis

-Original Message-
From: adrien mistretta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 5:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; De Taeye, Herman
Subject: Re: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17
Solaris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board


 3. How can I really test that the board is used and not the internal
 engine?

you can use the csdiag command to see if request are made to the crypto
card,
but I don't remember the option.

Adrien
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17 Sol aris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board

[lgazis]

There's a known issue with the openssl speed test when running the OpenSSL
0.9.6 engine version with Cryptoswift on Solaris; it will be addressed in a
future release.  The situation which is causing a routine in the speed test
to be interrupted does not occur in Apache, so you should still be able to
use Cryptoswift with Solaris, OpenSSL 0.9.6 engine version, and Apache
without difficulty.

Let me know if you have any further questions or issues.

Lynn Gazis
Rainbow Technologies

-Original Message-
From: De Taeye, Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 6:30 AM
To: 'lgazis'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; De Taeye, Herman; Gyutani
(E-mail)
Subject: RE: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17
Sol aris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board


Thanks for the diagnostic program. With the delivery by Sun an other program
called cstest located in /opt/SUNWconn/sunsecure/vts/bin.  This program has
other options, but finally returns similar output.  
csdiag showed that when running openssl speed rsa1024 -engine cswift, the
card processed 1440 requests.
During the test it comes up with an error :

# openssl speed rsa1024 -engine cswift
engine "cswift" set.
Doing 1024 bit private rsa's for 10s: RSA sign failure
17338:error:26067072:engine routines:CSWIFT_MOD_EXP_CRT:request
failed:hw_cswift
.c:524:CryptoSwift error number is -10004
1 1024 bit private RSA's in 0.29s
Doing 1024 bit public rsa's for 10s: RSA verify failure
17338:error:26066072:engine routines:CSWIFT_MOD_EXP:request
failed:hw_cswift.c:4
13:CryptoSwift error number is -10004
1 1024 bit public RSA's in 0.67s
OpenSSL 0.9.6 [engine] 24 Sep 2000
built on: Wed Feb 21 15:15:24 MET 2001
options:bn(64,32) md2(int) rc4(ptr,char) des(idx,cisc,16,long) idea(int)
blowfis
h(ptr) 
compiler: gcc -fPIC -DTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H
-mcpu=ultr
asparc -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall -DB_ENDIAN -DBN_DIV2W -DULTRASPARC
-DMD5_A
SM
  signverifysign/s verify/s
rsa 1024 bits   0.2900s   0.6700s  3.4  1.5
For this problem I had opened an other contact.

When installing openssl and configuring Apache.1.3.17, all seems to be OK.
Thanks to you all for the prompt support in trying to solve my problem. 

Best regards,

Herman De Taeye
Unisys Belgium.


-Original Message-
From: lgazis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 4:30 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; De Taeye, Herman
Subject: RE: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17 Sol
aris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board

1) csdiag -a 0
2) Run your test.
3) csdiag -a 0

If the interrupts haven't gone up by more than a couple, then the card isn't
being accessed (in which case, I'd suggest following John Airey's advice
about SSL_EXPERIMENTAL and SSLCryptoDevice, or you can email
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for help).

Lynn Gazis

-Original Message-
From: adrien mistretta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 5:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; De Taeye, Herman
Subject: Re: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17
Solaris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board


 3. How can I really test that the board is used and not the internal
 engine?

you can use the csdiag command to see if request are made to the crypto
card,
but I don't remember the option.

Adrien
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17 Solaris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board

[adrien mistretta]

 3. How can I really test that the board is used and not the internal
 engine?

you can use the csdiag command to see if request are made to the crypto card, 
but I don't remember the option.

Adrien
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17 Solaris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board

[lgazis]

1) csdiag -a 0
2) Run your test.
3) csdiag -a 0

If the interrupts haven't gone up by more than a couple, then the card isn't
being accessed (in which case, I'd suggest following John Airey's advice
about SSL_EXPERIMENTAL and SSLCryptoDevice, or you can email
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for help).

Lynn Gazis

-Original Message-
From: adrien mistretta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 5:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; De Taeye, Herman
Subject: Re: Apache_1.3.17, Openssl-engine-0.9.6, mod_ssl-2.8.0-1.3.17
Solaris 2.7,CryptoSwift accelerator board


 3. How can I really test that the board is used and not the internal
 engine?

you can use the csdiag command to see if request are made to the crypto
card, 
but I don't remember the option.

Adrien
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

openssl-engine has some problem with profiling

[Jihui Yang]

Has anybody ever used profiling(CFLAGS=-pg) to analyze  the amount of time 
spent in each routine in openssl? I tried it in openssl-engine-0.9.6. But 
the option -pg seemed to conflict with the option of  -fomit-frame-pointer, 
so I got rid of the latter. But when I tried to do speed test(apps/openssl 
speed -engine cswift), it failed. THe following is the error message:

can't use that engine
6653:error:25067066:DSO support routines:DLFCN_LOAD:could not load the 
shared library:dso_dlfcn.c:157:
6653:error:25072066:DSO support routines:DSO_load:could not load the shared 
library:dso_lib.c:230:
6653:error:26065068:engine routines:CSWIFT_INIT:DSO failure:hw_cswift.c:271:
6653:error:2607E06D:engine routines:ENGINE_SET_DEFAULT_TYPE:init 
failed:engine_lib.c:399:
error in speed

I'm using FreeBSD 4.1. I did add -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H when I did 
config, and there was no problem when I didn't use profiling. Only when I 
added -pg and got rid of -formit-frame-pointer did this problem exist. Does 
anybody has such experience? Please give me some hint.



Thanks a lot,
Jennifer
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

using nCipher nFast w/ openssl-engine-0.9.6-beta2 ?

[Peter Clark]

I've compiled and installed the latest Apache / mod_ssl and
openssl-engine-0.9.6-beta2 on a solaris 7/sparc system.

Everything works fine until I try to use the engine part, eg:

OpenSSL speed -engine chil
can't use that engine
29176:error:25067066:DSO support routines:DLFCN_LOAD:could not load the
shared library:dso_dlfcn.c:157:
29176:error:25072066:DSO support routines:DSO_load:could not load the shared
library:dso_lib.c:230:
29176:error:26088068:engine routines:HWCRHK_INIT:DSO
failure:hw_ncipher.c:400:
29176:error:2607E06D:engine routines:ENGINE_SET_DEFAULT_TYPE:init
failed:engine_lib.c:399:
error in speed

Are there any docs on getting this to work?   I've got the software that
came w/ the nCipher nFast card in /opt/nfast , and it is logging connections
whenever I use the patched old version of OpenSSL it came with, but not for
anything related to the openssl-engine stuff I've built.

  -pete

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using nCipher nFast w/ openssl-engine-0.9.6-beta2 ?

[Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker]

From: Peter Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]

pclark OpenSSL speed -engine chil
pclark can't use that engine
pclark 29176:error:25067066:DSO support routines:DLFCN_LOAD:could not load the
pclark shared library:dso_dlfcn.c:157:
pclark 29176:error:25072066:DSO support routines:DSO_load:could not load the shared
pclark library:dso_lib.c:230:
pclark 29176:error:26088068:engine routines:HWCRHK_INIT:DSO
pclark failure:hw_ncipher.c:400:
pclark 29176:error:2607E06D:engine routines:ENGINE_SET_DEFAULT_TYPE:init
pclark failed:engine_lib.c:399:
pclark error in speed

It attempts to load libhwcrhk.so, which is ni /opt/tools/hwcrhk, if
memory serves me righ (I don't have a machine to look at for the
moment).  What you need to do is make sure that you have that
directory as part of the value of the environment variable
LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

-- 
Richard Levitte   \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chairman@Stacken   \ S-168 35  BROMMA  \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
Redakteur@Stacken   \  SWEDEN   \ or +46-709-50 36 10
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Software Engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/

Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/ for more info.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: openssl engine version beta2 compilation problems

[David Maurus]

I've had the same problem and discovered the following patch:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssl-devm=96923042325868w=2

The functions are loaded dynamically, so it is necessary to check whether they
loaded or not (or your executable will crash on all machines which don't provide
the NetStatisticsGet-Function). The patch above includes theses tests which are
missing in the plain beta2-tree.

Additionally, I couldn't compile with VC60 because LMSTR was an unknown type. I
had to replace these definitions by LPWSTR:

typedef NET_API_STATUS (NET_API_FUNCTION * NETSTATGET)
(LPWSTR, LPWSTR, DWORD, DWORD, LPBYTE*);
typedef NET_API_STATUS (NET_API_FUNCTION * NETFREE)(LPBYTE);

Regards,
David Maurus

Lin Geng wrote:

 However, the file rand_win.c compiles if you make the following changes:

 1. comment out the two typedefs

 typedef NET_API_STATUS (NET_API_FUNCTION * NETSTATGET)
 (LMSTR, LMSTR, DWORD, DWORD, LPBYTE*);
 typedef NET_API_STATUS (NET_API_FUNCTION * NETFREE)(LPBYTE);

 2. add two defines

 #define NETSTATGET FARPROC
 #define NETFREE FARPROC

 The build should go through.


David Maurus

__
equinux Aktiengesellschaft
Informationstechnologien
Gabelsbergerstr. 30
80333 München - Germany
Tel. 089/520465-0
Fax. 089/520465-299
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.equinux.de

MyJack - Das innovative Messagingsystem der equinux AG
http://www.myjack.de


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Problem compiling openssl engine beta2 on NT

[Eric Korsia]

I tried to compile on a Win32 platforom openssl engine beta2, and the
OpenSSL beta2, and I recieve in both case this error:

cl /Fotmp32dll\rand_win.obj  -Iinc32 -Itmp32dll /MD /W3 /WX /G5 /Ox /O2 /Ob2
/Gs0 /GF /Gy /nologo -DWIN32 -DWIN3
2_LEAN_AND_MEAN -DL_ENDIAN /Fdout32dll /GD -D_WINDLL -D_DLL  -c
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c
rand_win.c
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ')'
before '*'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2143: syntax error : missing '{'
before '*'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2059: syntax error : ')'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2059: syntax error : ';'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(190) : error C2065: 'NETSTATGET' : undeclared
identifier
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(190) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';'
before identifier 'netstatget'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(190) : error C2065: 'netstatget' : undeclared
identifier
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(191) : error C2275: 'NETFREE' : illegal use of this
type as an expression
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(176) : see declaration of 'NETFREE'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(191) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';'
before identifier 'netfree'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(191) : error C2065: 'netfree' : undeclared
identifier
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(201) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';'
before identifier 'GetProcAddress'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(202) : warning C4047: '=' : 'int ' differs in
levels of indirection from 'unsigned long (__stdc
all *)(unsigned char *)'
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(209) : error C2063: 'netstatget' : not a function
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(212) : error C2063: 'netfree' : not a function
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(214) : error C2063: 'netstatget' : not a function
.\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(217) : error C2063: 'netfree' : not a function
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'cl' : return code '0x2'

Is there a solution to this problem?

Thanks,
ERIC
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Problem compiling openssl engine beta2 on NT

[Jeffrey Altman]

Try replacing LMSTR with LPWSTR in crypto/rand/rand_win.c



 I tried to compile on a Win32 platforom openssl engine beta2, and the
 OpenSSL beta2, and I recieve in both case this error:
 
 cl /Fotmp32dll\rand_win.obj  -Iinc32 -Itmp32dll /MD /W3 /WX /G5 /Ox /O2 /Ob2
 /Gs0 /GF /Gy /nologo -DWIN32 -DWIN3
 2_LEAN_AND_MEAN -DL_ENDIAN /Fdout32dll /GD -D_WINDLL -D_DLL  -c
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c
 rand_win.c
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ')'
 before '*'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2143: syntax error : missing '{'
 before '*'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2059: syntax error : ')'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(175) : error C2059: syntax error : ';'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(190) : error C2065: 'NETSTATGET' : undeclared
 identifier
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(190) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';'
 before identifier 'netstatget'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(190) : error C2065: 'netstatget' : undeclared
 identifier
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(191) : error C2275: 'NETFREE' : illegal use of this
 type as an expression
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(176) : see declaration of 'NETFREE'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(191) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';'
 before identifier 'netfree'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(191) : error C2065: 'netfree' : undeclared
 identifier
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(201) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';'
 before identifier 'GetProcAddress'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(202) : warning C4047: '=' : 'int ' differs in
 levels of indirection from 'unsigned long (__stdc
 all *)(unsigned char *)'
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(209) : error C2063: 'netstatget' : not a function
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(212) : error C2063: 'netfree' : not a function
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(214) : error C2063: 'netstatget' : not a function
 .\crypto\rand\rand_win.c(217) : error C2063: 'netfree' : not a function
 NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'cl' : return code '0x2'
 
 Is there a solution to this problem?
 
 Thanks,
 ERIC
 __
 OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
 User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 



  Jeffrey Altman * Sr.Software Designer
 The Kermit Project * Columbia University
   612 West 115th St * New York, NY * 10025 * USA
 http://www.kermit-project.org/ * [EMAIL PROTECTED]


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]