> > Hi Pascal, > > On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 08:37:11AM +0000, Pascal Van Leeuwen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was attempting to get some fuzzing going for the RFC3686 AEAD ciphers I'm adding to the > > inside-secure driver, and I noticed some more things besides what I mentioned below: > > > > 1) If there is no test suite, but the entry does point to something other then alg_test_null, > > then fuzzing is still not performed if there is no test suite, as all of the alg_test_xxx routines > > first check for suite->count being > 0 and exit due to count being 0 in this case. > > I would think that if there are no reference vectors, then fuzzing against the generic > > implementation (if enabled) is the very least you can do? > > > > 2) The AEAD fuzzing routine attempts to determine the maximum key size by actually > > scanning the test suite. So if there is no test suite, this will remain at zero and the AEAD > > fuzzing routine will still exit without performing any tests because of this. > > Isn't there a better way to determine the maximum key size for AEAD ciphers? > > > > 3) The AEAD fuzzing vector generation generates fully random keydata that is <= maxlen. > > However, for AEAD ciphers, the key blob is actually some RTA struct containing length > > fields and types. Which means that most of the time, it will simply be generating illegal > > key blobs and you are merely testing whether both implementations correctly flag the > > key as illegal. (for which they likely use the same crypto_authenc_extractkeys > > subroutine, so that check probably/likely always passes - and therefore is not very useful) > > > > Yes, these are real issues; we need to make the testing code smarter and perhaps > add some more test vectors too. But just to clarify (since you keep using the > more general phrase "AEAD ciphers"), these issues actually only apply to RFC3686 > ciphers, a.k.a. algorithms with "authenc" in their name, not to other AEADs in > the crypto API such as GCM, ChaCha20-Poly1305, and AEGIS128. > Ok, since I was just working on authenc ciphersuites I assumed that the "other" (real) AEAD's would work the same way, good to know that's not the case. AES-GCM and AES-CCM are next on my list (after my holiday though) ... > There's no way to easily determine the max key size of an arbitrary AEAD > currently, since it's not stored in struct aead_alg. That's why the current > code is scanning the test vectors. Instead, we probably should store > information about the supported key sizes and formats directly in struct > alg_test_desc, independent of the test vectors themselves. That would make it > possible to solve all three issues you've identified. > > - Eric > Yes, that should work I guess. That would also allow it to be an actual *list* of correct values instead of assuming a range between 0 and max, where only a few values are truly valid, which is wasting a lot of testvectors. This would apply to skciphers as well. Pascal van Leeuwen Silicon IP Architect, Multi-Protocol Engines @ Verimatrix www.insidesecure.com
