I've fixed the known failure and kindly ask to rerun the GitHub CI for https://github.com/openssh/openssh-portable/pull/325 and approve the PR in general. On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 9:31 AM Dmitry Belyavskiy <dbelyavs@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 5:33 AM James Ralston <ralston@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 4:34 AM Jochen Bern <Jochen.Bern@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >> > On 10.06.22 16:50, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: >> > >> > > There is a need to increase RSA key requirements to make the >> > > installations more secure. Just updating the default compiled-in >> > > value isn't an option because it may significantly break legacy >> > > systems compatibility. This PR [1] introduces a new configuration >> > > option MinRSABits to be managed for security's sake. >> > > >> > > If this approach is OK for upstream, please let me know and I will >> > > improve this PR according to the feedback. >> > >> > I realize that with the *current* selection of algorithms available >> > in OpenSSH, fine-grained control of minimum key size almost(!) is an >> > RSA-only topic, but nonetheless I wonder whether newly-defined >> > config syntax thereto should be aimed at extensibility to other >> > cryptalgorithms ... >> >> That ship sailed long ago: >> >> $ grep SSH_RSA_MINIMUM_MODULUS_SIZE sshkey.h >> #define SSH_RSA_MINIMUM_MODULUS_SIZE 1024 >> >> It’s not worth it to attempt to refactor this approach, as with both >> the ecdsa family and ed25519, the cipher name specifies the security >> strength. >> >> Dmitry’s merge request both defaults MinRSABits to >> SSH_RSA_MINIMUM_MODULUS_SIZE, and prohibits setting MinRSABits to >> anything less than SSH_RSA_MINIMUM_MODULUS_SIZE. So unless the >> administrator specifically sets MinRSABits to something greater than >> 1024, it will not change the behavior of OpenSSH. It also documents >> MinRSABits in the man pages, and includes MinRSABits in “ssh -G” >> output. All of this seems perfectly reasonable. >> > > I also need to adjust tests. > > >> NIST Special Publication 800-131A (1) prohibits the use of RSA keys >> with len(n) < 2048 for all uses but legacy digital signature >> verification, and an increasing number of sites (including ours) must >> comply with NIST SP 800-131A. Having the MinRSABits option would make >> our lives easier with respect to compliance. >> >> (1) https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-131Ar2 > > > Yes, and this was a part of my (unwritten) rationale :) > > -- > Dmitry Belyavskiy > -- Dmitry Belyavskiy _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
