2016-03-06 01:43:55 +00:00
|
|
|
====================================
|
|
|
|
Low-level Cryptography Specification
|
|
|
|
====================================
|
|
|
|
.. meta::
|
2016-04-01 23:28:07 +00:00
|
|
|
:category: Design
|
2016-03-06 01:43:55 +00:00
|
|
|
:lastupdated: December 2014
|
|
|
|
:accuratefor: 0.9.17
|
|
|
|
|
2016-03-06 06:23:19 +00:00
|
|
|
.. contents::
|
|
|
|
|
2016-03-06 01:43:55 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overview
|
|
|
|
========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This page specifies the low-level details of the cryptography in I2P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a handful of cryptographic algorithms in use within I2P, but we have
|
|
|
|
reduced them to a bare minimum to deal with our needs - one symmetric algorithm
|
|
|
|
one asymmetric algorithm, one signing algorithm, and one hashing algorithm.
|
|
|
|
However, we do combine them in some particular ways to provide message
|
|
|
|
integrity (rather than relying on a MAC). In addition, as much as we hate
|
|
|
|
doing anything new in regards to cryptography, we can't seem to find a
|
|
|
|
reference discussing (or even naming) the technique used in
|
|
|
|
ElGamal/AES+SessionTag [ELG-AES]_ (but we're sure others have done it).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asymmetric encryption
|
|
|
|
=====================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ElGamal
|
|
|
|
-------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ElGamal is used for asymmetric encryption. ElGamal is used in several places
|
|
|
|
in I2P:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* To encrypt router-to-router [TunnelBuild]_ messages
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* For end-to-end (destination-to-destination) encryption as a part of
|
|
|
|
ElGamal/AES+SessionTag [ELG-AES]_ using the encryption key in the [LeaseSet]_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* For encryption of some netDb stores and queries sent to floodfill routers
|
|
|
|
[NETDB-DELIVERY]_ as a part of ElGamal/AES+SessionTag [ELG-AES]_
|
|
|
|
(destination-to-router or router-to-router).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We use common primes for 2048 ElGamal encryption and decryption, as given by
|
|
|
|
IETF [RFC-3526]_. We currently only use ElGamal to encrypt the IV and session
|
|
|
|
key in a single block, followed by the AES encrypted payload using that key and
|
|
|
|
IV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The unencrypted ElGamal contains:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. raw:: html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{% highlight lang='dataspec' %}
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
|nonz| H(data) |
|
|
|
|
+----+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
| | data...
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+-//
|
|
|
|
{% endhighlight %}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The H(data) is the SHA256 of the data that is encrypted in the ElGamal block,
|
|
|
|
and is preceded by a nonzero byte. This byte could be random, but as
|
|
|
|
implemented it is always 0xFF. It could possibly be used for flags in the
|
|
|
|
future. The data encrypted in the block may be up to 222 bytes long. As the
|
|
|
|
encrypted data may contain a substantial number of zeros if the cleartext is
|
|
|
|
smaller than 222 bytes, it is recommended that higher layers pad the cleartext
|
|
|
|
to 222 bytes with random data. Total length: typically 255 bytes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The encrypted ElGamal contains:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. raw:: html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{% highlight lang='dataspec' %}
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
| zero padding... | |
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+-//-+----+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| ElG encrypted part 1 |
|
|
|
|
~ ~
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
| | zero padding... | |
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+----+-//-+----+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| ElG encrypted part 2 |
|
|
|
|
~ ~
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
| +
|
|
|
|
+----+----+
|
|
|
|
{% endhighlight %}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each encrypted part is prepended with zeros to a size of exactly 257 bytes.
|
|
|
|
Total length: 514 bytes. In typical usage, higher layers pad the cleartext
|
|
|
|
data to 222 bytes, resulting in an unencrypted block of 255 bytes. This is
|
|
|
|
encoded as two 256-byte encrypted parts, and there is a single byte of zero
|
|
|
|
padding before each part at this layer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See the ElGamal code [ElGamalEngine]_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The shared prime is the Oakley prime for 2048 bit keys [RFC-3526-S3]_::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2^2048 - 2^1984 - 1 + 2^64 * { [2^1918 pi] + 124476 }
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or as a hexadecimal value::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF C90FDAA2 2168C234 C4C6628B 80DC1CD1
|
|
|
|
29024E08 8A67CC74 020BBEA6 3B139B22 514A0879 8E3404DD
|
|
|
|
EF9519B3 CD3A431B 302B0A6D F25F1437 4FE1356D 6D51C245
|
|
|
|
E485B576 625E7EC6 F44C42E9 A637ED6B 0BFF5CB6 F406B7ED
|
|
|
|
EE386BFB 5A899FA5 AE9F2411 7C4B1FE6 49286651 ECE45B3D
|
|
|
|
C2007CB8 A163BF05 98DA4836 1C55D39A 69163FA8 FD24CF5F
|
|
|
|
83655D23 DCA3AD96 1C62F356 208552BB 9ED52907 7096966D
|
|
|
|
670C354E 4ABC9804 F1746C08 CA18217C 32905E46 2E36CE3B
|
|
|
|
E39E772C 180E8603 9B2783A2 EC07A28F B5C55DF0 6F4C52C9
|
|
|
|
DE2BCBF6 95581718 3995497C EA956AE5 15D22618 98FA0510
|
|
|
|
15728E5A 8AACAA68 FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using 2 as the generator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _exponent:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short Exponent
|
|
|
|
``````````````
|
|
|
|
While the standard exponent size is 2048 bits (256 bytes) and the I2P
|
|
|
|
[PrivateKey]_ is a full 256 bytes, in some cases we use the short exponent size
|
|
|
|
of 226 bits (28.25 bytes). This should be safe for use with the Oakley primes
|
|
|
|
[vanOorschot1996]_ [BENCHMARKS]_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, [Koshiba2004]_ apparently supports this, according to this sci.crypt
|
|
|
|
thread [SCI.CRYPT]_. The remainder of the PrivateKey is padded with zeroes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior to release 0.9.8, all routers used the short exponent. As of release
|
|
|
|
0.9.8, 64-bit x86 routers use a full 2048-bit exponent. Other routers continue
|
|
|
|
to use the short exponent due to concerns about processor load. The transition
|
|
|
|
to a longer exponent for these platforms is a topic for further study.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obsolescence
|
|
|
|
````````````
|
|
|
|
The vulnerability of the network to an ElGamal attack and the impact of
|
|
|
|
transitioning to a longer bit length is to be studied. It may be quite
|
|
|
|
difficult to make any change backward-compatible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Symmetric encryption
|
|
|
|
====================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AES
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AES is used for symmetric encryption, in several cases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* For transport encryption (see section "`Transports`_") after DH key exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* For end-to-end (destination-to-destination) encryption as a part of
|
|
|
|
ElGamal/AES+SessionTag [ELG-AES]_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* For encryption of some netDb stores and queries sent to floodfill routers
|
|
|
|
[NETDB-DELIVERY]_ as a part of ElGamal/AES+SessionTag [ELG-AES]_
|
|
|
|
(destination-to-router or router-to-router).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* For encryption of periodic tunnel test messages [TUNNEL-TESTING]_ sent from
|
|
|
|
the router to itself, through its own tunnels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We use AES with 256 bit keys and 128 bit blocks in CBC mode. The padding used
|
|
|
|
is specified in IETF [RFC-2313]_ (PKCS#5 1.5, section 8.1 (for block type 02)).
|
|
|
|
In this case, padding exists of pseudorandomly generated octets to match 16
|
|
|
|
byte blocks. Specifically, see the CBC code [CryptixAESEngine]_ and the
|
|
|
|
Cryptix AES implementation [CryptixRijndael_Algorithm]_, as well as the
|
|
|
|
padding, found in the ElGamalAESEngine.getPadding function [ElGamalAESEngine]_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. Believe it or not, we don't do this any more. If we ever did. safeEncode() and safeDecode() are unused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. In all cases, we know the size of the data to be sent, and we AES encrypt the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. .. raw:: html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. % highlight lang='dataspec' %}
|
|
|
|
.. +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
| H(data) |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
| size | data ... |
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+----+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
~ ~
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
+ +----//---+----+
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----//---+----+ +
|
|
|
|
| Padding to 16 bytes |
|
|
|
|
+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. H(data) :: 32-byte SHA-256 `Hash` of the data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. . size :: 4-byte `Integer`, number of data bytes to follow
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. . data :: payload
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. . padding :: random data, to a multiple of 16 bytes
|
|
|
|
.. % endhighlight %}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. After the data comes an application-specified number of randomly generated
|
|
|
|
padding bytes. This application-specified number is rounded up to a multiple
|
|
|
|
of 16. The entire segment (from H(data) through the end of the random bytes)
|
|
|
|
is AES encrypted (256 bit CBC w/ PKCS#5).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. This code is implemented in the safeEncrypt and safeDecrypt methods of
|
|
|
|
AESEngine but it is unused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obsolescence
|
|
|
|
````````````
|
|
|
|
The vulnerability of the network to an AES attack and the impact of
|
|
|
|
transitioning to a longer bit length is to be studied. It may be quite
|
|
|
|
difficult to make any change backward-compatible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
|
|
|
|
``````````
|
|
|
|
* [STATUS-AES]_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _sig:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSA is the default signature algorithm, but we are in the process of migrating
|
|
|
|
to more secure algorithms. See below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSA
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures are generated and verified with 1024 bit [DSA]_ (L=1024, N=160), as
|
|
|
|
implemented in [DSAEngine]_. DSA was chosen because it is much faster for
|
|
|
|
signatures than ElGamal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEED
|
|
|
|
````
|
|
|
|
160 bit::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86108236b8526e296e923a4015b4282845b572cc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counter
|
|
|
|
```````
|
|
|
|
::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSA prime (p)
|
|
|
|
`````````````
|
|
|
|
1024 bit::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9C05B2AA 960D9B97 B8931963 C9CC9E8C 3026E9B8 ED92FAD0
|
|
|
|
A69CC886 D5BF8015 FCADAE31 A0AD18FA B3F01B00 A358DE23
|
|
|
|
7655C496 4AFAA2B3 37E96AD3 16B9FB1C C564B5AE C5B69A9F
|
|
|
|
F6C3E454 8707FEF8 503D91DD 8602E867 E6D35D22 35C1869C
|
|
|
|
E2479C3B 9D5401DE 04E0727F B33D6511 285D4CF2 9538D9E3
|
|
|
|
B6051F5B 22CC1C93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSA quotient (q)
|
|
|
|
````````````````
|
|
|
|
::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A5DFC28F EF4CA1E2 86744CD8 EED9D29D 684046B7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSA generator (g)
|
|
|
|
`````````````````
|
|
|
|
1024 bit::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0C1F4D27 D40093B4 29E962D7 223824E0 BBC47E7C 832A3923
|
|
|
|
6FC683AF 84889581 075FF908 2ED32353 D4374D73 01CDA1D2
|
|
|
|
3C431F46 98599DDA 02451824 FF369752 593647CC 3DDC197D
|
|
|
|
E985E43D 136CDCFC 6BD5409C D2F45082 1142A5E6 F8EB1C3A
|
|
|
|
B5D0484B 8129FCF1 7BCE4F7F 33321C3C B3DBB14A 905E7B2B
|
|
|
|
3E93BE47 08CBCC82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The [SigningPublicKey]_ is 1024 bits. The [SigningPrivateKey]_ is 160 bits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obsolescence
|
|
|
|
````````````
|
|
|
|
[NIST-800-57]_ recommends a minimum of (L=2048, N=224) for usage beyond 2010.
|
|
|
|
This may be mitigated somewhat by the "cryptoperiod", or lifespan of a given
|
|
|
|
key.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prime number was chosen in 2003 [CHOOSING-CONSTANTS]_, and the person that
|
|
|
|
chose the number (TheCrypto) is currently no longer an I2P developer. As such,
|
|
|
|
we do not know if the prime chosen is a 'strong prime'. If a larger prime is
|
|
|
|
chosen for future purposes, this should be a strong prime, and we will document
|
|
|
|
the construction process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
|
|
|
|
``````````
|
|
|
|
* [MEETING-51]_
|
|
|
|
* [MEETING-52]_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Signature Algorithms
|
|
|
|
========================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of release 0.9.12, the router supports additional signature algorithms that
|
|
|
|
are more secure than 1024-bit DSA. The first usage is for Destinations;
|
|
|
|
support for Router Identities was added in release 0.9.16. Support for
|
|
|
|
migrating existing Destinations from old to new signatures will be added in a
|
|
|
|
future release. Signature type is encoded in the Destination and Router
|
|
|
|
Identity, so that new signature algorithms or curves may be added at any time.
|
|
|
|
The current supported signature types are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* DSA-SHA1
|
|
|
|
* ECDSA-SHA256-P256
|
|
|
|
* ECDSA-SHA384-P384
|
|
|
|
* ECDSA-SHA512-P521
|
|
|
|
* RSA-SHA256-2048
|
|
|
|
* RSA-SHA384-3072
|
|
|
|
* RSA-SHA512-4096
|
|
|
|
* EdDSA-SHA512-Ed25519 (as of release 0.9.15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ECDSA
|
|
|
|
-----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ECDSA uses the standard NIST curves and standard SHA-2 hashes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We will migrate new destinations to ECDSA-SHA256-P256 in the 0.9.16 - 0.9.19
|
|
|
|
release time frame. Usage for Router Identities is supported as of release
|
|
|
|
0.9.16 and migration may occur in early 2015.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSA
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 (RFC 2313) with the public exponent F4 = 65537.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSA is now used for signing all out-of-band trusted content, including router
|
|
|
|
updates, reseeding, plugins, and news. The signatures are embedded in the
|
|
|
|
"su3" format [UPDATES]_. 4096-bit keys are recommended and used by all known
|
|
|
|
signers. RSA is not used, or planned for use, in any in-network Destinations
|
|
|
|
or Router Identities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EdDSA 25519
|
|
|
|
-----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard EdDSA using curve 25519 and standard 512-bit SHA-2 hashes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supported as of release 0.9.15.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Migration for Destinations and Router Identities is scheduled for mid-2015.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hashes
|
|
|
|
======
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHA256
|
|
|
|
------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hashes within I2P are plain old SHA256, as implemented in [SHA256Generator]_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obsolescence
|
|
|
|
````````````
|
|
|
|
The vulnerability of the network to a SHA-256 attack and the impact of
|
|
|
|
transitioning to a longer hash is to be studied. It may be quite difficult to
|
|
|
|
make any change backward-compatible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
|
|
|
|
``````````
|
|
|
|
* [SHA-2]_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transports
|
|
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At the lowest protocol layer, point-to-point inter-router communication is
|
|
|
|
protected by the transport layer security. Both transports use 256 byte (2048
|
|
|
|
bit) Diffie-Hellman key exchange using the same shared prime and generator as
|
|
|
|
specified above for ElGamal_, followed by symmetric AES encryption as described
|
|
|
|
above. This provides perfect forward secrecy [PFS]_ on the transport links.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _tcp:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NTCP connections
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NTCP connections are negotiated with a 2048 Diffie-Hellman implementation,
|
|
|
|
using the router's identity to proceed with a station to station agreement,
|
|
|
|
followed by some encrypted protocol specific fields, with all subsequent data
|
|
|
|
encrypted with AES (as above). The primary reason to do the DH negotiation
|
|
|
|
instead of using ElGamalAES+SessionTag [ELG-AES]_ is that it provides
|
|
|
|
'(perfect) forward secrecy' [PFS]_, while ElGamalAES+SessionTag does not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to migrate to a more standardized implementation (TLS/SSL or even
|
|
|
|
SSH), the following issues must be addressed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Can we somehow reestablish sessions securely (ala session tags) or do we
|
|
|
|
need to do full negotiation each time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Can we simplify/avoid the x509 or other certificate formats and use our own
|
|
|
|
RouterInfo structure (which contains the ElGamal and DSA keys)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See the NTCP specification [NTCP]_ for details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _udp:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UDP connections
|
|
|
|
---------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSU (the UDP transport) encrypts each packet with AES256/CBC with both an
|
|
|
|
explicit IV and MAC (HMAC-MD5-128) after agreeing upon an ephemeral session key
|
|
|
|
through a 2048 bit Diffie-Hellman exchange, station-to-station authentication
|
|
|
|
with the other router's DSA key, plus each network message has their own hash
|
|
|
|
for local integrity checking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See the SSU specification [SSU-KEYS]_ for details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WARNING - I2P's HMAC-MD5-128 used in SSU is apparently non-standard.
|
|
|
|
Apparently, an early version of SSU used HMAC-SHA256, and then it was switched
|
|
|
|
to MD5-128 for performance reasons, but left the 32-byte buffer size intact.
|
|
|
|
See HMACGenerator.java and the 2005-07-05 status notes [STATUS-HMAC]_ for
|
|
|
|
details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
|
|
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [BENCHMARKS]
|
|
|
|
{{ site_url('misc/benchmarks', True) }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crypto++ benchmarks, originally at http://www.eskimo.com/~weidai/benchmarks.html (now dead),
|
|
|
|
rescued from http://www.archive.org/, dated Apr 23, 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [CHOOSING-CONSTANTS]
|
|
|
|
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.invisiblenet.iip.devel/343
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [CryptixAESEngine]
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/i2p/i2p.i2p/tree/master/core/java/src/net/i2p/crypto/CryptixAESEngine.java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [CryptixRijndael_Algorithm]
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/i2p/i2p.i2p/tree/master/core/java/src/net/i2p/crypto/CryptixRijndael_Algorithm.java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [DSA]
|
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Signature_Algorithm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [DSAEngine]
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/i2p/i2p.i2p/tree/master/core/java/src/net/i2p/crypto/DSAEngine.java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [ELG-AES]
|
|
|
|
{{ site_url('docs/how/elgamal-aes') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [ElGamalEngine]
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/i2p/i2p.i2p/tree/master/core/java/src/net/i2p/crypto/ElGamalEngine.java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [ElGamalAESEngine]
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/i2p/i2p.i2p/tree/master/core/java/src/net/i2p/crypto/ElGamalAESEngine.java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [Koshiba2004]
|
|
|
|
Koshiba & Kurosawa. Short Exponent Diffie-Hellman Problems. PKC 2004, LNCS 2947, pp. 173-186
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.springerlink.com/content/2jry7cftp5bpdghm/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Full text: http://books.google.com/books?id=cXyiNZ2_Pa0C&lpg=PA173&ots=PNIz3dWe4g&pg=PA173#v=onepage&q&f=false
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [LeaseSet]
|
|
|
|
{{ ctags_url('LeaseSet') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [MEETING-51]
|
|
|
|
{{ get_url('meetings_show', id=51) }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [MEETING-52]
|
|
|
|
{{ get_url('meetings_show', id=52) }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [NETDB-DELIVERY]
|
|
|
|
{{ site_url('docs/how/network-database', True) }}#delivery
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [NIST-800-57]
|
|
|
|
http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-57/sp800-57-Part1-revised2_Mar08-2007.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [NTCP]
|
|
|
|
{{ site_url('docs/transport/ntcp', True) }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [PFS]
|
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_forward_secrecy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [PrivateKey]
|
|
|
|
{{ ctags_url('PrivateKey') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [RFC-2313]
|
|
|
|
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [RFC-3526]
|
|
|
|
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3526
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [RFC-3526-S3]
|
|
|
|
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3526#section-3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [SCI.CRYPT]
|
|
|
|
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.crypt/browse_thread/thread/1855a5efa7416677/339fa2f945cc9ba0#339fa2f945cc9ba0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [SHA-2]
|
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [SHA256Generator]
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/i2p/i2p.i2p/tree/master/core/java/src/net/i2p/crypto/SHA256Generator.java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [SigningPrivateKey]
|
|
|
|
{{ ctags_url('SigningPrivateKey') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [SigningPublicKey]
|
|
|
|
{{ ctags_url('SigningPublicKey') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [SSU-KEYS]
|
|
|
|
{{ site_url('docs/transport/ssu', True) }}#keys
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [STATUS-AES]
|
|
|
|
Feb. 7, 2006 Status Notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{ get_url('blog_post', slug='2006/02/07/status') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [STATUS-HMAC]
|
|
|
|
Jul. 5, 2005 Status Notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{ get_url('blog_post', slug='2005/07/05/status') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [TunnelBuild]
|
|
|
|
{{ ctags_url('TunnelBuild') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [TUNNEL-TESTING]
|
|
|
|
{{ site_url('docs/how/tunnel-routing', True) }}#testing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [UPDATES]
|
|
|
|
{{ spec_url('updates') }}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. [vanOorschot1996]
|
|
|
|
van Oorschot, Weiner. On Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement with Short Exponents. EuroCrypt '96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.14.5952&rep=rep1&type=pdf
|