phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Argon2 using memset still

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALiR+uMcyOnMejMmszvd3TLUYsLQJkXi71o3C17fVH4hd0U-0A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 09:07:24 +0000
From: Sascha Schmidt <sascha.schmidt@...-weimar.de>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Argon2 using memset still

Maybe it would be wise to additionally add compiler attributes that prevent
 the optimization of a function:
__attribute__((optnone)) for clang
__attribute__((optimize("O0"))) for gcc
They are available for clang 3.5 or newer and gcc 4.4 or newer. You can
combine them to something like this:

#if defined(__clang__)
#if __has_attribute(optnone)
 __attribute__((optnone))
#endif
#elif defined(__GNUC__)
#define GCC_VERSION (__GNUC__ * 10000 \
                    + __GNUC_MINOR__ * 100 \
                    + __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__)
#if GCC_VERSION >= 40400
  __attribute__((optimize("O0")))
#endif
#endif

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:58 PM Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@...il.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 8/27/15, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com> wrote:
>> > g++ has a habit of optimizing calls to memset away.  I doubt that Argon2
>> > succeed in it's attempts to clear memory.  I copied this function from
>> > Blake2:
>> >
>> > /* prevents compiler optimizing out memset() */
>> > static inline void secure_zero_memory( void *v, size_t n )
>> > {
>> >   volatile uint8_t *p = ( volatile uint8_t * )v;
>> >   while( n-- ) *p++ = 0;
>> > }
>>
>> This is an improvement over memset, but note the comment above
>> secure_wipe() in
>> https://github.com/dfoxfranke/earworm/blob/master/util-ref.h.
>>
>
> True, but using secure_zero_memory is an improvement :)
>
> I prefer to call the core hashing function a few times with small, but
> exponentially increasing memory sizes.  This will overwrite just about
> everything, providing slightly improved garbage-collector attack resistance
> without much performance loss.  However, it increases complexity, and I
> think I was the only one who felt the additional security against
> garbage-collection attacks was worth it.
>
>

Content of type "text/html" skipped