Generate Keypairs with strong prng provider (SHA1PRNG)

[Bernd Eckenfels]

Hello,

yes on Java 8 the keytool will use SHA1PRNG (on Windows) and with Java 9 it will use DRBG(128,reseed_only).

I guess both are not well suited for larger permanent keys (like Keytool is supposed to create). But agreed, the Java 9 default is less problematic.

Hmm.. thinking out loud. maybe the concept of a strong PRNG does not match well with nonces and personalisation. With the addition of DRBG and the wide variety of parameters, is getInstanceStrong() rather obsolete in 9 or will it be used by the platform?

Instead of trusting Windows CAPI it would be nice to have a DRBG reseeding from it as the default strong secure random. Then it would also be fit for use for key generation.

Gruss
Bernd

Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net

________________________________
From: Weijun Wang <weijun.wang at oracle.com>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 1:20:29 AM
To: Bernd; security-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: Generate Keypairs with strong prng provider (SHA1PRNG)

new SecureRandom() should not return SHA1PRNG on JDK 9. If NativePRNG is
the preferred provider, it will be returned. Otherwise, DRBG will be
used. DRBG is preferred to SHA1PRNG on every platform.

Thanks
Max


On 03/17/2017 07:36 AM, Bernd wrote:
> Hello,
>
> as a general precaution I wanted to document key generation best
> practice. The SHA1PRNG with its small state and single 20 byte seed
> always is a bit questionable for generating long term keys. 160 bit
> entropy (as long as the SecureRandom instance is used only once) is not
> enough for larger RSA Keys or AES192 and 256.
>
> So I was looking for a solution which works on 8 and 9 and involves more
> seed/state than the SHA1PRNG. On Windows the Windows-PRNG and on Linux
> the NativePRNGs both look better in this regard. The
> SecureRandom.getInstanceStrong() automatially uses them.
>
> So while I think in the long run it might be better to wrap those
> generators with DRBG some more I think a minimum is to use the strong
> variant for key generation. I peeked into keytool to see whats best
> practice and I noticed it does unfortunately NOT use the strong variant
> or a DRBG configuration:
>
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/file/c95ebfceb394/src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/tools/keytool/CertAndKeyGen.java#l150
>
> Is it really acceptable for long term keys this way? (I guess no answer
> means no :)
>
> Would it be possible to bump the security level for keytool in 9?
>
> Gruss
> Bernd
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/security-dev/attachments/20170317/e657e3e3/attachment.htm>