Adding a nounce before hashing as covert channel (Re: phasing out SHA1 for digest creation)
Bernhard Reiter via Gnupg-devel <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Am Samstag 07 Dezember 2024 15:35:09 schrieb Andrew Gallagher via Gnupg-devel: > there are already countless places in the wire format that an adversary > could use for a covert channel, It still may not be wise to add another place. There can be unwanted side effects of adding a nonce (is what I understand from the example). > and I’m not aware of any implementation > (including gnupg) that attempts to close these channels, perhaps because > doing so would be a rich source of interop failures. It would be > counterproductive for an adversary to introduce salted signatures for this > purpose, as doing so would only draw attention for little further benefit. Which we only know if we fully understand all side effects. Not saying that this is done deliberately. Regards, Bernhard -- https://intevation.de/~bernhard +49 541 33 508 3-3 Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998 Geschäftsführer: Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter _______________________________________________ Gnupg-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 659 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGzBAABCgAdFiEEvdlX+cT+D9xYPc1tK3ujv5vDpVQFAmdYAFMACgkQK3ujv5vD pVTwyQv/SL/zM4qIZVriHqXQ3z1PblNlsOVx+VT8g2I0t1mK0OnrSGn2yIavuQSh JG9ELZfRYNuQyAP3nZTqoOR6dU4nAbtlnWjw6g8B8JUtgmLluqKtr6qsj5SMZXTi PopjAHBnsdhXm+TTFX2hv+4C5IsCdjKuCmDDbwgpVqTyIk/4tJ6k6e3XzpYGC4zP HSWH4+3YHg9FLRbr795h3KELe0rPDJDdt7flDY2ple4do3wclMvG4OxTM+tjYO4f witR7x6Gb7Yupb4flbaHLkbVppx03CYUHs1JOr84equiM1vjlEFB5N9wf87iUr4N TH5PbKtAyU505BHpcE9OpauSPC+CtExCpAdSNZOaDC/kiclCxnUD6EPMP8ienYK4 WoEjQNTBmiR74rEAUpGRQfG1wPzvsColeMk5NOx5KG18uA0uoipFIuvkOIPXXPP3 7Y0t039LfxHW8D+P9G1odGBjXJcZkNV9m11mfwJAzEGx2fr1MnPxUrm7ixDONk/Q 0a9EO3zm =acoJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----