Re: Question about Curve P-192

Denis <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.x509
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Michael,

I don't see how RFC 5480 can be used to obtain an *identifier* for a 
cryptographic *suite* for both P-192 and
a SHA-256 hash function truncated to 192 bits.

In between, I got a response why the leftmost bits shall be used.

Close to the end of section 6.4NIST FIPS 186-4 
<http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/NIST.FIPS.186-4.pdf> states:

    When the length of the output of the hash function is greater than
    the bit length of /n/, then the *leftmost **/n/**bits* of the hash
    function
    output block *shall be used* in any calculation using the hash
    function output during the generation or verification of a digital
    signature.

    A hash function that provides a lower security strength than the
    security strength associated with the bit length of n ordinarily
    *should not*
    be used, since this would reduce the security strength of the
    digital signature process to a level no greater than that provided
    by the hash function.

Denis

> Actually see RFC5480.  It describes a set of suggested pairings of 
> signature strengths and hashes and includes recommendations for P-192.
>
> Re Russ’s comment, the ECDSAWithShaxxx identifiers can be used with 
> any curve, (but follow the 5480 and other similar document pairing 
> recommendations)   so it’s not exactly correct that there are no 
> algorithm identifiers.
>
> Lastly, AFAICT NIST didn’t originally define the P192 curve - it just 
> incorporated a previously defined curve in a set of acceptable 
> parameters when it was NISTifying EC cryptography.
>
> Mike
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 17:47 Denis <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Ernst, Russ and Dan,
>
>     Thank your for your replies. This is what I feared : there is no
>     cryptographic suite defined for P-192.
>     Quite strange that NIST defined the algorithm and didn't defined a
>     hash function to go with it.
>
>     Key sizes need to be appreciated relative to the environment where
>     they are used.
>
>     P-192 would be used in a constrained environment where the size of
>     the digital signature matters (i.e. the smaller, the better).
>
>     The verification of the digital signature would be real time. The
>     private key should resist one year, because it would be changed
>     every year.
>
>     P-192 seems to be a good trade-off between the security level and
>     the size of the digital signature.
>
>     A SHA-192 function has been defined in a paper available at:
>     http://www.ijctee.org/files/VOLUME2ISSUE3/IJCTEE_0612_24.pdf.
>     The title of this paper is : Performance Analysis of SHA
>     Algorithms (SHA-1 and SHA-192): A Review
>     However, I don't believe that any crypto-library supports it.
>
>     So Ernst's method would certainly be one way to do it, but why not
>     take the 192 low bits ?
>
>     The last question would be for Ernst who wrote:
>
>         The corresponding signature suite can be defined with ISO
>         14888-3, which allows the specification of the algo
>
>         (e.g. EC-DSA, EC-KCDSA or whatsoever), the curve and the hash
>         function.
>
>     What would the OID or the URI for this suite, if we take the 192
>     left bits ? Same question if we take the 192 low bits ?
>
>
>     Denis
>
>>     Hi Denis,
>>
>>      Please, do not use P-192, unless there are some severe constraints.
>>
>>     Even if you credit EC with a very generous 16 extra bits in
>>     security (compared to hashes & ciphers), P-192 would only reach
>>     96+16=112-bit security, which does not meet the current best
>>     practice of 128 bit security.
>>
>>      History as I understand it: NIST P-192 was meant for the 80-bit
>>     level (though it looks like 96-bit). This low security level has
>>     been widely deprecated since 2010, at least informally - to what
>>     extent it is formally deprecated, I don’t recall off-hand. I
>>     recall added text to ANSI X9.62/63 deprecating this security level.
>>
>>     Anyway, originally, the idea was to use P-192 with SHA-1, P-224
>>     with SHA-224, etc.
>>
>>     I think that there were also OIDs for P-192, e.g. secp192k1, and
>>     OIDs for ECDSA-with-SHA1, which could be combined in some ways. 
>>     I do not recall how far these OIDs made into IETF, i.e. as
>>     algorithm identifiers.
>>
>>     Using 160-bit hash in ECDSA with P-192 renders the EU-CMA
>>     security to 80 bits, which is waste considering that P-192
>>     potentially provides 96-bit security.  As noted in the thread
>>     below, the standards have options to truncate a longer hash,
>>     which should correct this.
>>
>>      Arguably, the security of P-192 has fared far better than SHA-1
>>     in some ways, yet SHA-1 is probably much more widely used than
>>     P-192, though admittedly hashes are considered a general purpose
>>     tool.
>>
>>      Best regards,
>>
>>     Dan
>>
>>
>>     *From:* pkix [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Russ
>>     Housley
>>     *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2018 1:30 PM
>>     *To:* Ernst G Giessmann <[email protected]>
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     *Cc:* IETF PKIX <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     *Subject:* Re: [pkix] Question about Curve P-192
>>
>>      Ernst:
>>
>>      Of course, this technique works.  That said, I am not aware of
>>     any algorithm identifiers that make use of the P-192 curve for
>>     digital signature or key agreement.
>>
>>      Russ
>>
>>       On May 10, 2018, at 1:24 PM, Ernst G Giessmann
>>     <[email protected]
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>         Yes, there is a standardized way:
>>         Pick up a corresponding hash function, in case of P-192 it
>>         should be SHA-224 and take the 192 left most bits of the hash
>>         value as the input to the EC sign primitive.
>>         The correspondig signature suite can be defined with ISO
>>         14888-3, which allows the specification of the algo (e.g.
>>         EC-DSA, EC-KCDSA or whatsoever), the curve and the hash function.
>>         Kind regards,
>>         /Ernst.
>>
>>         Am 2018-05-10 um 19:07 schrieb Denis:
>>
>>             Hello everybody,
>>
>>             Curve P-192 is specified in FIPS PUB 186-4 (Digital
>>             Signature Standard (DSS)).
>>
>>             There is no "SHA-192" hash function defined in FIPS PUB
>>             180-4 (Secure Hash Standard (SHS)).
>>
>>             Is there any standardized way to use a hash function with
>>             Curve P-192 ?
>>
>>             Is there any RFC or any another document that specifies a
>>             cryptographic suite for Curve P-192 ?
>>
>>             Denis
>>
>>

_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
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.