[security-dev 01201]: Re: 6840752: Provide out-of-the-box support for ECC algorithms

Andrew John Hughes gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org
Thu Sep 10 13:02:39 PDT 2009


2009/9/10 Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org>:
> 2009/9/9 Vincent Ryan <Vincent.Ryan at sun.com>:
>> Hello Andrew,
>>
>> I realize that you, along with others in the Linux community, are less
>> than satisfied with the changeset to provide out-of-the-box support for
>> ECC algorithms.
>>
>> As I mentioned earlier, we were quite constrained in what we could
>> openly discuss before we pushed. However, now that we have pushed I
>> am eager to fix any problems that I've introduced.
>>
>
> Yes, I can understand that to an extent, but I find it hard to believe
> that you had to push it before it could even be discussed.  Why could
> the same patch that was pushed not have been posted for public review
> instead?
>
> This seems to be a more general issue.  This is endemic behaviour that
> I've seen from the majority of Sun engineers working on OpenJDK (there
> are thankfully some exceptions) and I've blogged about this in more
> detail: http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2009/09/08/im-so-tired/
>
>> We wish to reconcile the conflicting demands of including an ECC
>> implementation for platforms without underlying ECC support with the
>> exclusion of the ECC implementation on platforms with underlying ECC
>> support. I'd like to solicit input from security-dev on how best to
>> achieve this.
>>
>
> It's good to hear you're open to changing this.  There is a third
> option you've missed; the demand of not wanting ECC support at all.
> You'll be aware that there are legal issues from your own discussions
> on this within Sun, and the change in direction that occurred.  Not
> having ECC support needs to be an option as well.
>
> The existing ECC implementation already fulfilled two of these
> demands; it could be enabled on platforms with ECC support but this
> wasn't the default case.  We can make this easier with IcedTea by
> detecting NSS at build time and auto-generating the configuration if
> the user wishes.  This also can be used to ship it 'out of the box' on
> distributions if required; all the distro packager has to do is build
> IcedTea with NSS support enabled and then make their binary depend on
> it.
>
> So the real problem here is that Sun's proprietary builds can't ship
> it 'out of the box' because they don't know if the system it ends up
> on will have NSS and, even if it does, where it will be located.  I
> can understand how that's a problem that needs to be fixed, but we
> need a way of disabling that.  If the PKCS11 provider is still
> suitable, then making building the ec directory would actually be
> enough:
>
> ifndef DISABLE_NSS
>  SUBDIRS += ec
> endif
>
> Job done.  A more complex solution is to link against the system NSS
> instead of the provided C sources.  I've managed to do this with the
> following change:
>
> diff -r 7a23bfc44c92 make/sun/security/ec/Makefile
> --- a/make/sun/security/ec/Makefile     Tue Sep 08 18:03:43 2009 +0100
> +++ b/make/sun/security/ec/Makefile     Wed Sep 09 23:50:24 2009 +0100
> @@ -153,7 +153,9 @@
>   #
>   # C and C++ files
>   #
> +ifndef USE_SYSTEM_NSS
>   include FILES_c.gmk
> +endif
>
>   FILES_cpp = ECC_JNI.cpp
>
> @@ -185,6 +187,11 @@
>     OTHER_LDLIBS += $(JVMLIB)
>   else
>     OTHER_LDLIBS = -ldl $(JVMLIB) $(LIBCXX)
> +    ifdef USE_SYSTEM_NSS
> +      OTHER_LDLIBS += -Wl,-rpath $(SYSTEM_NSS_DIR) -Wl,-rpath
> $(SYSTEM_NSPR_DIR) \
> +        -L$(SYSTEM_NSS_DIR) -L$(SYSTEM_NSPR_DIR) -lnssutil3 -lnss3 \
> +        -lplds4 -lplc4 -lnspr4 -lsoftokn -lfreebl
> +    endif
>   endif
>
>   include $(BUILDDIR)/common/Mapfile-vers.gmk
>
> but unfortunately, while the resulting sunecc library is dynamically
> linked against NSS, it causes HotSpot to segfault in
> sun.security.ec.ECKeyPairGenerator.generateECKeyPair(I[B[B)[J.  I'm
> still looking into this, I assume there is either some mismatch in the
> versions of NSS or local changes in the Sun copy.  As you say, only
> part of the library was imported into OpenJDK; does this mean that the
> JNI code is not using published interfaces for NSS?
>
>> Your proposal to supply an NSS config file for the SunPKCS11 provider
>> is one approach but what about platforms where an ECC-enabled NSS is
>> not present?
>>
>>
>
> It's only really an idea that works where we have an autoconf wrapper
> to detect NSS at build time, and which also allows it to be disabled.
> The patch to IcedTea automatically finds out where NSS is installed,
> via pkg-config, and writes the config file based on that.  I don't
> know of a portable way of doing that in OpenJDK's makefiles as
> pkg-config won't be available on all platforms.
>
> snip...
>
>>
>>>  * Which version of NSS were these sources pulled from?  Running diff
>>> -bu on them, and ignoring the additional copyright headers,
>>>  there are still a large number of changes.  I suspect this is
>>> because the version is older than my system copy (3.12.3); notably my
>>>  testing shows it does not exhibit the bug discussed in
>>>
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2009-September/001167.html
>>> (which
>>>  incidentally is still awaiting review).
>>
>> The sources were pulled from OpenSolaris 2009.06.
>>
>
> Ok, so which version of NSS does that have?
>
>>
>>>  * Why was a new provider used instead of the existing
>>> sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 provider?  I noticed this has not be
>>> removed, yet
>>>  it appears to provide duplicate functionality unless I'm mistaken.
>>> This does perhaps mean we could fix the issues with this changeset
>>> simply
>>>  by allowing the ec subdirectory to be turned off, but there may be
>>> something about the new provider I'm missing.
>>
>> We introduced the new SunEC provider because we wanted a fast compact
>> ECC implementation that we could ship on all platforms. We have not
>> bundled all of NSS - only its ECC implementation.
>>
>
> Yeah I noticed that.  I suppose the big question is how interchangable
> are SunEC and PKCS11?  Could we just turn off SunEC, given we already
> have NSS support via PKCS11?  If so, just making SunEC optional would
> solve this IMO.
>
>>
>>
>>>  * I notice that a number of algorithms are replaced with NULL.  I
>>> assume there is some (perhaps legal) reason for this?
>>
>> Which ones?
>>
>
> This is the change I'm referring to:
>
> /* mapping between ECCurveName enum and pointers to ECCurveParams */
>  static const ECCurveParams *ecCurve_map[] = {
>     NULL,                               /* ECCurve_noName */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_P192,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P192 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_P224,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P224 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_P192 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_P224 */
>     &ecCurve_NIST_P256,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P256 */
>     &ecCurve_NIST_P384,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P384 */
>     &ecCurve_NIST_P521,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P521 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_K163,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_K163 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_B163,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_B163 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_K233,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_K233 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_B233,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_B233 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_K283,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_K283 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_B283,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_B283 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_K409,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_K409 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_B409,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_B409 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_K571,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_K571 */
> -    &ecCurve_NIST_B571,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_B571 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_PRIME_192V2,         /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_192V2 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_PRIME_192V3,         /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_192V3 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V1,         /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V2,         /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V2 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V3,         /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V3 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V2,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V2 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V3,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V3 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB176V1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB176V1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V2,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V2 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V3,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V3 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB208W1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB208W1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V2,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V2 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V3,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V3 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB272W1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB272W1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB304W1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB304W1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB359V1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB359V1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB368W1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB368W1 */
> -    &ecCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB431R1,      /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB431R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_112R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_112R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_112R2,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_112R2 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_128R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_128R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_128R2,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_128R2 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_160K1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_160K1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_160R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_160R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_160R2,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_160R2 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_192K1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_192K1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_224K1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_224K1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_PRIME_256K1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_256K1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_113R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_113R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_113R2,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_113R2 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_131R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_131R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_131R2,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_131R2 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_163R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_163R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_193R1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_193R1 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_193R2,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_193R2 */
> -    &ecCurve_SECG_CHAR2_239K1,          /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_239K1 */
> -    &ecCurve_WTLS_1,                    /* ECCurve_WTLS_1 */
> -    &ecCurve_WTLS_8,                    /* ECCurve_WTLS_8 */
> -    &ecCurve_WTLS_9,                    /* ECCurve_WTLS_9 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_K163 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_B163 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_K233 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_B233 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_K283 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_B283 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_K409 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_B409 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_K571 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_NIST_B571 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_192V2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_192V3 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_PRIME_239V3 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB163V3 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB176V1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB191V3 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB208W1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB239V3 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB272W1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB304W1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB359V1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_PNB368W1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_X9_62_CHAR2_TNB431R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_112R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_112R2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_128R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_128R2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_160K1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_160R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_160R2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_192K1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_224K1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_PRIME_256K1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_113R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_113R2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_131R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_131R2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_163R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_193R1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_193R2 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_SECG_CHAR2_239K1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_WTLS_1 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_WTLS_8 */
> +       NULL,                   /* ECCurve_WTLS_9 */
>     NULL                                /* ECCurve_pastLastCurve */
>  };
>
>
> It could be a NSS version issue, but seems more deliberate to me.
> It leaves three curves:
>     &ecCurve_NIST_P256,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P256 */
>     &ecCurve_NIST_P384,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P384 */
>     &ecCurve_NIST_P521,                 /* ECCurve_NIST_P521 */
>
>>
>>>
>>> I'm afraid my current impression of this changeset is that it doesn't
>>> help us with packaging OpenJDK for GNU/Linux distributions at all, but
>>> instead makes things ten times worse as there is now a stale NSS to
>>> contend with.  Not only are there the issues with bit rot I alluded to
>>> last time, but as you mention in your reply there are legal issues
>>> with EC support.  Notably, I've found that Fedora doesn't ship any EC
>>> support (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492124) so we'd
>>> have to rip this out in packages for that distribution (and it's
>>> dubious whether others should be shipping it).  IANAL, so I won't
>>> comment further on such issues, but suffice to say this changeset
>>> significantly reduces the options for handling NSS support downstream.
>>>  In contrast, the existing support in 1.6 is almost ideal, once you've
>>> discovered how it works; the distro packager can choose whether to
>>> enable support or not and they don't have to worry about rotting
>>> security code in OpenJDK.  Maybe I'm missing something but this makes
>>> me think this would have been better as a local addition to Sun's
>>> proprietary builds rather than adding it to OpenJDK.
>>>
>>> I try to be as positive as I can about the OpenJDK project, but I'm
>>> sorry to say that changesets like this don't help.  I actually find
>>> them quite depressing.  As I said in my previous email, there appears
>>> to have been no discussion of this change; it was merely committed
>>> with no public review and appeared in b70.  Meanwhile, myself and
>>> other external contributors have to spend days trying to get replies
>>> to emails to even get a simple bug fix in (I've lost count of how many
>>> I still have waiting; there must be at least four or five).  That's
>>> just not fair and doesn't bode well for a successful community
>>> project.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Andrew :-)
>
> Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
>
> Support Free Java!
> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
> http://openjdk.java.net
>
> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
>

I've added this changeset:

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/icedtea/jdk7/jdk/rev/2a1a7fb44226

to the IcedTea project's JDK7 forest to solve this issue.  If it looks
ok, then give me a bug ID and I'll push it to tl-gate.
-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8



More information about the security-dev mailing list