1
0
mirror of https://git.tartarus.org/simon/putty.git synced 2025-01-09 17:38:00 +00:00
putty-source/test/testcrypt-enum.h

186 lines
7.3 KiB
C
Raw Permalink Normal View History

BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(hashalg)
ENUM_VALUE("md5", &ssh_md5)
ENUM_VALUE("sha1", &ssh_sha1)
ENUM_VALUE("sha1_sw", &ssh_sha1_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("sha256", &ssh_sha256)
ENUM_VALUE("sha384", &ssh_sha384)
ENUM_VALUE("sha512", &ssh_sha512)
ENUM_VALUE("sha256_sw", &ssh_sha256_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("sha384_sw", &ssh_sha384_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("sha512_sw", &ssh_sha512_sw)
#if HAVE_SHA_NI
ENUM_VALUE("sha1_ni", &ssh_sha1_ni)
ENUM_VALUE("sha256_ni", &ssh_sha256_ni)
#endif
#if HAVE_NEON_CRYPTO
ENUM_VALUE("sha1_neon", &ssh_sha1_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("sha256_neon", &ssh_sha256_neon)
#endif
#if HAVE_NEON_SHA512
ENUM_VALUE("sha384_neon", &ssh_sha384_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("sha512_neon", &ssh_sha512_neon)
#endif
ENUM_VALUE("sha3_224", &ssh_sha3_224)
ENUM_VALUE("sha3_256", &ssh_sha3_256)
ENUM_VALUE("sha3_384", &ssh_sha3_384)
ENUM_VALUE("sha3_512", &ssh_sha3_512)
ENUM_VALUE("shake256_114bytes", &ssh_shake256_114bytes)
ENUM_VALUE("blake2b", &ssh_blake2b)
END_ENUM_TYPE(hashalg)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(macalg)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_md5", &ssh_hmac_md5)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_sha1", &ssh_hmac_sha1)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_sha1_buggy", &ssh_hmac_sha1_buggy)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_sha1_96", &ssh_hmac_sha1_96)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_sha1_96_buggy", &ssh_hmac_sha1_96_buggy)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_sha256", &ssh_hmac_sha256)
ENUM_VALUE("hmac_sha512", &ssh_hmac_sha512)
ENUM_VALUE("poly1305", &ssh2_poly1305)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aesgcm", &ssh2_aesgcm_mac)
ENUM_VALUE("aesgcm", &ssh2_aesgcm_mac)
ENUM_VALUE("aesgcm_sw", &ssh2_aesgcm_mac_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("aesgcm_ref_poly", &ssh2_aesgcm_mac_ref_poly)
#if HAVE_CLMUL
ENUM_VALUE("aesgcm_clmul", &ssh2_aesgcm_mac_clmul)
#endif
#if HAVE_NEON_PMULL
ENUM_VALUE("aesgcm_neon", &ssh2_aesgcm_mac_neon)
#endif
END_ENUM_TYPE(macalg)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(keyalg)
ENUM_VALUE("dsa", &ssh_dsa)
ENUM_VALUE("rsa", &ssh_rsa)
ENUM_VALUE("ed25519", &ssh_ecdsa_ed25519)
ENUM_VALUE("ed448", &ssh_ecdsa_ed448)
ENUM_VALUE("p256", &ssh_ecdsa_nistp256)
ENUM_VALUE("p384", &ssh_ecdsa_nistp384)
ENUM_VALUE("p521", &ssh_ecdsa_nistp521)
ENUM_VALUE("dsa-cert", &opensshcert_ssh_dsa)
ENUM_VALUE("rsa-cert", &opensshcert_ssh_rsa)
ENUM_VALUE("ed25519-cert", &opensshcert_ssh_ecdsa_ed25519)
ENUM_VALUE("p256-cert", &opensshcert_ssh_ecdsa_nistp256)
ENUM_VALUE("p384-cert", &opensshcert_ssh_ecdsa_nistp384)
ENUM_VALUE("p521-cert", &opensshcert_ssh_ecdsa_nistp521)
END_ENUM_TYPE(keyalg)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(cipheralg)
ENUM_VALUE("3des_ctr", &ssh_3des_ssh2_ctr)
ENUM_VALUE("3des_ssh2", &ssh_3des_ssh2)
ENUM_VALUE("3des_ssh1", &ssh_3des_ssh1)
ENUM_VALUE("des_cbc", &ssh_des)
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_ctr", &ssh_aes256_sdctr)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_gcm", &ssh_aes256_gcm)
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_cbc", &ssh_aes256_cbc)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_ctr", &ssh_aes192_sdctr)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_gcm", &ssh_aes192_gcm)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_cbc", &ssh_aes192_cbc)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_ctr", &ssh_aes128_sdctr)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_gcm", &ssh_aes128_gcm)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_cbc", &ssh_aes128_cbc)
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_ctr_sw", &ssh_aes256_sdctr_sw)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_gcm_sw", &ssh_aes256_gcm_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_cbc_sw", &ssh_aes256_cbc_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_ctr_sw", &ssh_aes192_sdctr_sw)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_gcm_sw", &ssh_aes192_gcm_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_cbc_sw", &ssh_aes192_cbc_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_ctr_sw", &ssh_aes128_sdctr_sw)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_gcm_sw", &ssh_aes128_gcm_sw)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_cbc_sw", &ssh_aes128_cbc_sw)
#if HAVE_AES_NI
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_ctr_ni", &ssh_aes256_sdctr_ni)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_gcm_ni", &ssh_aes256_gcm_ni)
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_cbc_ni", &ssh_aes256_cbc_ni)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_ctr_ni", &ssh_aes192_sdctr_ni)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_gcm_ni", &ssh_aes192_gcm_ni)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_cbc_ni", &ssh_aes192_cbc_ni)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_ctr_ni", &ssh_aes128_sdctr_ni)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_gcm_ni", &ssh_aes128_gcm_ni)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_cbc_ni", &ssh_aes128_cbc_ni)
#endif
#if HAVE_NEON_CRYPTO
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_ctr_neon", &ssh_aes256_sdctr_neon)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_gcm_neon", &ssh_aes256_gcm_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("aes256_cbc_neon", &ssh_aes256_cbc_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_ctr_neon", &ssh_aes192_sdctr_neon)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_gcm_neon", &ssh_aes192_gcm_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("aes192_cbc_neon", &ssh_aes192_cbc_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_ctr_neon", &ssh_aes128_sdctr_neon)
Implement AES-GCM using the @openssh.com protocol IDs. I only recently found out that OpenSSH defined their own protocol IDs for AES-GCM, defined to work the same as the standard ones except that they fixed the semantics for how you select the linked cipher+MAC pair during key exchange. (RFC 5647 defines protocol ids for AES-GCM in both the cipher and MAC namespaces, and requires that you MUST select both or neither - but this contradicts the selection policy set out in the base SSH RFCs, and there's no discussion of how you resolve a conflict between them! OpenSSH's answer is to do it the same way ChaCha20-Poly1305 works, because that will ensure the two suites don't fight.) People do occasionally ask us for this linked cipher/MAC pair, and now I know it's actually feasible, I've implemented it, including a pair of vector implementations for x86 and Arm using their respective architecture extensions for multiplying polynomials over GF(2). Unlike ChaCha20-Poly1305, I've kept the cipher and MAC implementations in separate objects, with an arm's-length link between them that the MAC uses when it needs to encrypt single cipher blocks to use as the inputs to the MAC algorithm. That enables the cipher and the MAC to be independently selected from their hardware-accelerated versions, just in case someone runs on a system that has polynomial multiplication instructions but not AES acceleration, or vice versa. There's a fourth implementation of the GCM MAC, which is a pure software implementation of the same algorithm used in the vectorised versions. It's too slow to use live, but I've kept it in the code for future testing needs, and because it's a convenient place to dump my design comments. The vectorised implementations are fairly crude as far as optimisation goes. I'm sure serious x86 _or_ Arm optimisation engineers would look at them and laugh. But GCM is a fast MAC compared to HMAC-SHA-256 (indeed compared to HMAC-anything-at-all), so it should at least be good enough to use. And we've got a working version with some tests now, so if someone else wants to improve them, they can.
2022-08-16 17:36:58 +00:00
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_gcm_neon", &ssh_aes128_gcm_neon)
ENUM_VALUE("aes128_cbc_neon", &ssh_aes128_cbc_neon)
#endif
ENUM_VALUE("blowfish_ctr", &ssh_blowfish_ssh2_ctr)
ENUM_VALUE("blowfish_ssh2", &ssh_blowfish_ssh2)
ENUM_VALUE("blowfish_ssh1", &ssh_blowfish_ssh1)
ENUM_VALUE("arcfour256", &ssh_arcfour256_ssh2)
ENUM_VALUE("arcfour128", &ssh_arcfour128_ssh2)
ENUM_VALUE("chacha20_poly1305", &ssh2_chacha20_poly1305)
END_ENUM_TYPE(cipheralg)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(dh_group)
ENUM_VALUE("group1", &ssh_diffiehellman_group1_sha1)
ENUM_VALUE("group14", &ssh_diffiehellman_group14_sha256)
ENUM_VALUE("group15", &ssh_diffiehellman_group15_sha512)
ENUM_VALUE("group16", &ssh_diffiehellman_group16_sha512)
ENUM_VALUE("group17", &ssh_diffiehellman_group17_sha512)
ENUM_VALUE("group18", &ssh_diffiehellman_group18_sha512)
END_ENUM_TYPE(dh_group)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(ecdh_alg)
ENUM_VALUE("curve25519", &ssh_ec_kex_curve25519)
ENUM_VALUE("curve448", &ssh_ec_kex_curve448)
ENUM_VALUE("nistp256", &ssh_ec_kex_nistp256)
ENUM_VALUE("nistp384", &ssh_ec_kex_nistp384)
ENUM_VALUE("nistp521", &ssh_ec_kex_nistp521)
END_ENUM_TYPE(ecdh_alg)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(rsaorder)
ENUM_VALUE("exponent_first", RSA_SSH1_EXPONENT_FIRST)
ENUM_VALUE("modulus_first", RSA_SSH1_MODULUS_FIRST)
END_ENUM_TYPE(rsaorder)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(primegenpolicy)
ENUM_VALUE("probabilistic", &primegen_probabilistic)
ENUM_VALUE("provable_fast", &primegen_provable_fast)
ENUM_VALUE("provable_maurer_simple", &primegen_provable_maurer_simple)
ENUM_VALUE("provable_maurer_complex", &primegen_provable_maurer_complex)
END_ENUM_TYPE(primegenpolicy)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(argon2flavour)
ENUM_VALUE("d", Argon2d)
ENUM_VALUE("i", Argon2i)
ENUM_VALUE("id", Argon2id)
/* I expect to forget which spelling I chose, so let's support many */
ENUM_VALUE("argon2d", Argon2d)
ENUM_VALUE("argon2i", Argon2i)
ENUM_VALUE("argon2id", Argon2id)
ENUM_VALUE("Argon2d", Argon2d)
ENUM_VALUE("Argon2i", Argon2i)
ENUM_VALUE("Argon2id", Argon2id)
END_ENUM_TYPE(argon2flavour)
New post-quantum kex: ML-KEM, and three hybrids of it. As standardised by NIST in FIPS 203, this is a lattice-based post-quantum KEM. Very vaguely, the idea of it is that your public key is a matrix A and vector t, and the private key is the knowledge of how to decompose t into two vectors with all their coefficients small, one transformed by A relative to the other. Encryption of a binary secret starts by turning each bit into one of two maximally separated residues mod a prime q, and then adding 'noise' based on the public key in the form of small increments and decrements mod q, again with some of the noise transformed by A relative to the rest. Decryption uses the knowledge of t's decomposition to align the two sets of noise so that the _large_ changes (which masked the secret from an eavesdropper) cancel out, leaving only a collection of small changes to the original secret vector. Then the vector of input bits can be recovered by assuming that those accumulated small pieces of noise haven't concentrated in any particular residue enough to push it more than half way to the other of its possible starting values. A weird feature of it is that decryption is not a true mathematical inverse of encryption. The assumption that the noise doesn't get large enough to flip any bit of the secret is only probabilistically valid, not a hard guarantee. In other words, key agreement can fail, simply by getting particularly unlucky with the distribution of your random noise! However, the probability of a failure is very low - less than 2^-138 even for ML-KEM-512, and gets even smaller with the larger variants. An awkward feature for our purposes is that the matrix A, containing a large number of residues mod the prime q=3329, is required to be constructed by a process of rejection sampling, i.e. generating random 12-bit values and throwing away the out-of-range ones. That would be a real pain for our side-channel testing system, which generally handles rejection sampling badly (since it necessarily involves data-dependent control flow and timing variation). Fortunately, the matrix and the random seed it was made from are both public: the matrix seed is transmitted as part of the public key, so it's not necessary to try to hide it. Accordingly, I was able to get the implementation to pass testsc by means of not varying the matrix seed between runs, which is justified by the principle of testsc that you vary the _secrets_ to ensure timing is independent of them - and the matrix seed isn't a secret, so you're allowed to keep it the same. The three hybrid algorithms, defined by the current Internet-Draft draft-kampanakis-curdle-ssh-pq-ke, include one hybrid of ML-KEM-768 with Curve25519 in exactly the same way we were already hybridising NTRU Prime with Curve25519, and two more hybrids of ML-KEM with ECDH over a NIST curve. The former hybrid interoperates with the implementation in OpenSSH 9.9; all three interoperate with the fork 'openssh-oqs' at github.com/open-quantum-safe/openssh, and also with the Python library AsyncSSH.
2024-12-07 19:33:39 +00:00
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(mlkem_params)
ENUM_VALUE("mlkem512", &mlkem_params_512)
ENUM_VALUE("mlkem768", &mlkem_params_768)
ENUM_VALUE("mlkem1024", &mlkem_params_1024)
END_ENUM_TYPE(mlkem_params)
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(fptype)
ENUM_VALUE("md5", SSH_FPTYPE_MD5)
ENUM_VALUE("sha256", SSH_FPTYPE_SHA256)
ENUM_VALUE("md5-cert", SSH_FPTYPE_MD5_CERT)
ENUM_VALUE("sha256-cert", SSH_FPTYPE_SHA256_CERT)
END_ENUM_TYPE(fptype)
/*
* cproxy.h already has a list macro mapping protocol-specified
* strings to the list of HTTP Digest hash functions. Rather than
* invent a separate one for testcrypt, reuse the existing names.
*/
BEGIN_ENUM_TYPE(httpdigesthash)
#define DECL_ARRAY(id, str, alg, bits, accepted) ENUM_VALUE(str, id)
HTTP_DIGEST_HASHES(DECL_ARRAY)
#undef DECL_ARRAY
END_ENUM_TYPE(httpdigesthash)