| commit | b628f8721e7e67302b0e26c92e0108a31066194e | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> | Sat Jan 13 17:47:14 2024 -0500 |
| committer | Boringssl LUCI CQ <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com> | Sun Jan 14 01:54:27 2024 +0000 |
| tree | e5a210922e67567710692e25ff001242e82ee627 | |
| parent | 9206d7ca41065a0e3c7cf0ba64f3bf496665770a [diff] |
Clear some false positives in constant-time validation These were flagged when patching the PRNG to return data marked secret. This CL doesn't include that part (I didn't run all tests, and other tests likely require further annotations), but it does include some of the declassifications necessary to do that later. Broadly: - Whenever we compute public keys from private keys, we must tell valgrind the public key is now public. (Valgrind does not know that cryptography works.) - Whenever we compute signatures from private keys, we must tell valgrind the signature is now public. (Ditto.) - Whenever we pass a secret value but check it is fully reduced, we must tell valgrind the comparison may be leaked. (Valgrind doesn't know these values are always within range... that we have to check at all is a consequence of OpenSSL's API and/or defensive coding.) - Valgrind does not know about the randomizing properties of blinding. We actually aim to be constant-time without RSA blinding, so that doesn't need an annotation, but the blinded inversion step in the process of computing the RSA blinding factor does. Bug: 676 Change-Id: Ic3a47adddb23a61fe452b9be27b214eec2ea5235 Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/65367 Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com> Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
BoringSSL is a fork of OpenSSL that is designed to meet Google's needs.
Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don't recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability.
Programs ship their own copies of BoringSSL when they use it and we update everything as needed when deciding to make API changes. This allows us to mostly avoid compromises in the name of compatibility. It works for us, but it may not work for you.
BoringSSL arose because Google used OpenSSL for many years in various ways and, over time, built up a large number of patches that were maintained while tracking upstream OpenSSL. As Google's product portfolio became more complex, more copies of OpenSSL sprung up and the effort involved in maintaining all these patches in multiple places was growing steadily.
Currently BoringSSL is the SSL library in Chrome/Chromium, Android (but it's not part of the NDK) and a number of other apps/programs.
Project links:
There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: