[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Draft-11: More complete results
Blake,
I don't know what I dumped the first time, but I now get the same CEKICV
as you do.
jim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blake Ramsdell [mailto:blake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 1:17 AM
> To: jimsch@xxxxxxxxxx; 'Ietf-Smime-Examples';
> ietf-smime@xxxxxxx; 'Paul Hoffman / IMC'
> Cc: 'Sean P. Turner'
> Subject: RE: Draft-11: More complete results
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jim Schaad [mailto:jimsch@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:30 PM
> > To: 'Ietf-Smime-Examples'; ietf-smime@xxxxxxx; 'Paul Hoffman / IMC'
> > Cc: 'Sean P. Turner'; Blake Ramsdell
> > Subject: Draft-11: More complete results
> >
> > 6.11 FAILED
> > test vectors are appended below on this message. I
> don't know where
> > I am going wrong and this code worked in the past.
>
> The bad news is, I can't get this example to work either.
> The good news is that I have written a new implementation,
> and it could very well have some kind of problem. I have
> only tested my implementation against the test vectors in RFC 3217.
>
> These are the results that I got with this example, using the
> terminology from RFC 3217 section 3.2 wherever possible:
>
> <lotsofboringhexdump>
> wrappedKey = 0x74, 0x31, 0xC0, 0x45, 0x51, 0x4C, 0x3C, 0x2D,
> 0x2E, 0xDA, 0x63, 0x50, 0x8B, 0xAE, 0xD4, 0xAC, 0x64, 0xCC,
> 0x95, 0xAE, 0xAF, 0xCD, 0x0F, 0x8C, 0xB6, 0x48, 0x1F, 0x0B,
> 0x45, 0x12, 0x4D, 0xFB, 0xA4, 0xAB, 0xC7, 0x83, 0x30, 0x4B, 0x69, 0xAD
>
> TEMP3 = 0xD7, 0x10, 0x66, 0xEE, 0x9A, 0x42, 0xE0, 0x80, 0x62,
> 0xA3, 0xE5, 0xDE, 0xB5, 0xEF, 0x4E, 0x7E, 0x5F, 0x13, 0x30,
> 0xB5, 0x13, 0xD3, 0xA8, 0x4F, 0xBE, 0xDC, 0x02, 0xD4, 0x81,
> 0x27, 0xDB, 0x50, 0xE5, 0xD8, 0x0F, 0xE9, 0x25, 0x38, 0xF1, 0x7B
>
> TEMP2 = 0x7B, 0xF1, 0x38, 0x25, 0xE9, 0x0F, 0xD8, 0xE5, 0x50,
> 0xDB, 0x27, 0x81, 0xD4, 0x02, 0xDC, 0xBE, 0x4F, 0xA8, 0xD3,
> 0x13, 0xB5, 0x30, 0x13, 0x5F, 0x7E, 0x4E, 0xEF, 0xB5, 0xDE,
> 0xE5, 0xA3, 0x62, 0x80, 0xE0, 0x42, 0x9A, 0xEE, 0x66, 0x10, 0xD7
>
> TEMP1 = 0x50, 0xDB, 0x27, 0x81, 0xD4, 0x02, 0xDC, 0xBE, 0x4F,
> 0xA8, 0xD3, 0x13, 0xB5, 0x30, 0x13, 0x5F, 0x7E, 0x4E, 0xEF,
> 0xB5, 0xDE, 0xE5, 0xA3, 0x62, 0x80, 0xE0, 0x42, 0x9A, 0xEE,
> 0x66, 0x10, 0xD7
>
> IV = 0x7B, 0xF1, 0x38, 0x25, 0xE9, 0x0F, 0xD8, 0xE5
>
> CEKICV = 0x51, 0x1B, 0x27, 0x0E, 0xE8, 0xEA, 0x33, 0x74,
> 0x37, 0xA5, 0x7D, 0xC7, 0xCC, 0x9B, 0x24, 0xCE, 0x32, 0x41,
> 0x19, 0x0F, 0x38, 0x47, 0x25, 0x2E, 0xC0, 0xCA, 0x0F, 0x30,
> 0x3B, 0x86, 0x2E, 0x3D
>
> CEK = 0x51, 0x1B, 0x27, 0x0E, 0xE8, 0xEA, 0x33, 0x74, 0x37,
> 0xA5, 0x7D, 0xC7, 0xCC, 0x9B, 0x24, 0xCE, 0x32, 0x41, 0x19,
> 0x0F, 0x38, 0x47, 0x25, 0x2E
>
> ICV = 0xC0, 0xCA, 0x0F, 0x30, 0x3B, 0x86, 0x2E, 0x3D
>
> computedICV = 0x53, 0xFB, 0x3E, 0xCC, 0x8A, 0x06, 0xCC, 0xAF
> </lotsofboringhexdump>
>
> Mapping your results onto mine:
>
> > Wrapped key
> > 0x0012F248 74 31 c0 45 51 4c 3c 2d 2e da 63 50 8b ae d4 ac
> > t1ÀEQL<-.ÚcP.®Ô¬ 0x0012F258 64 cc 95 ae af cd 0f 8c b6 48
> 1f 0b 45 12
> > 4d fb dÌ.®¯Í..¶H..E.M.
> > 0x0012F268 a4 ab c7 83 30 4b 69 ad ¤«Ç.0Ki
> >
> > Mail list key
> > 0x00324354 25 5e 0d 1c 07 b6 46 df b3 13 4c c8 43 ba 8a a7
> > %^...¶Fß³.LÈCº.§ 0x00324364 1f 02 5b 7c 08 38 25 1f
>
> We're on the same page here. I did not dump my Mail list
> key, but there are many problems I would have later if these
> weren't the same. Specifically, the next item would not match.
>
> > After decrypt #1
> > 0x00324630 d7 10 66 ee 9a 42 e0 80 62 a3 e5 de b5 ef 4e 7e
> > ×.f..B..b£.Þµ.N~ 0x00324640 5f 13 30 b5 13 d3 a8 4f be dc
> 02 d4 81 27
> > db 50 _.0µ.Ó¨O¾Ü.Ô.'ÛP
> > 0x00324650 e5 d8 0f e9 25 38 f1 7b .Ø..%8.{
>
> Same as TEMP3 from mine.
>
> > IV
> > 0x00324630 7b f1 38 25 e9 0f d8 e5 {.8%..Ø.
>
> Same as my IV also.
>
> > Post Decrypt #2
> > 0x00324630 50 db 27 81 d4 02 dc be 4f a8 d3 13 b5 30 13 5f
> > PÛ'.Ô.ܾO¨Ó.µ0._ 0x00324640 7e 4e ef b5 de e5 a3 62 80 e0
> 42 9a ee 66
> > 10 d7 ~N.µÞ.£b..B..f.×
>
> This should theoretically be the same as my CEKICV (which is
> the output of the second decryption), but it's not. This
> appears to be the same as my TEMP1 which is the input to the
> second decryption, not the output.
>
> > Computed check sum
> > 0x0012EFD8 53 fb 3e cc 8a 06 cc af S.>Ì..̯
>
> Same as my computedICV above. What I can't figure out is how
> we both arrived at the same checksum with such different
> answers for CEKICV (your "Post Decrypt #2"). My
> understanding is that it's the first eight bytes of the sha-1
> digest of the first 24 bytes of my CEKICV and your "Post Decrypt #2".
>
> > Actual Check sum
> > 80 e0 42 9a ee 66 10 d7
>
> This does not match my ICV above, but it matches the eight
> bytes at the end of your "Post Decrypt #2".
>
> I would hazard a guess that there is an error in one of our
> implementations where the input and the output of the second
> decryption step are being mistakenly interchanged. I have
> checked mine and run the test vectors from RFC 3217 through
> it, and I can't see the problem on my side. Now, I've said
> this kind of thing before and been wrong, so take it with a
> grain of salt...
>
> In any case, in my test, this example is broken also, but
> unless Jim and I can agree on an answer, it could be the case
> that both of our implementations are broken.
>
> Blake
>