RE: Experimental server for RSA SHA-2

Peter Gutmann <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.secsh
Message-ID <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4B5BD70@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
denis bider <[email protected]> writes:

>I have set up a server where we can test support for RSA SHA-2.
>
>You can connect to it at:
>
>experiment.bitvise.com:10712

So I figured this would be the quickest RFC (draft) implementation ever, one
line of code:

  { "rsa-sha2-256", 12, CRYPT_ALGO_RSA, CRYPT_ALGO_RSA, CRYPT_ALGO_SHA2 },

However, this doesn't work, for several reasons... the biggest problem is that
the hash algorithm HASH is already specified in the keyex method, for "diffie-
hellman-group-exchange-sha1" it's SHA-1 and for "diffie-hellman-group-
exchange-sha256" it's SHA2-256.  So specifying "rsa-sha2-256" for "diffie-
hellman-group-exchange- sha1" doesn't make sense, and specifying it for
"diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha256" is redundant.

Another problem is shown up by the argument about naming, that since this is a
standard SSH signature, the "ssh-" isn't needed.  Looking at the draft, this
isn't anything like any other SSH signature, it uses RSA-PSS not PKCS #1,
which no other SSH signature uses.  So it needs some indicator in the name
that it's a nonstandard signature type, not a standard SSH signature, e.g.
"ssh-rsa-pss" to contrast with the standard "ssh-rsa".  It also means that you
need to do an implementation of RSA-PSS just to support this signature type.

The result is that the draft is really "Use of RSA-PSS with SSH", not "Use of
RSA Keys with SHA-2 256 and 512 in Secure Shell (SSH)", since they're already
in use with SHA-2 when "diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha256" is used.

Peter.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.