Add AD mode to Transit's AEAD ciphers #17638
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| var factory interface{} | ||
|
|
||
| if item.AssociatedData != "" { | ||
| isAEAD := p.Type.String() == "aes128-gcm96" || p.Type.String() == "aes192-gcm96" || p.Type.String() == "aes256-gcm96" || p.Type.String() == "chacha20-poly1305" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we switch this to use the existing pattern of adding this test on the KeyType type in policy.go around line 146, instead of using string tests? For example we seem to have added an "impossible" key type value in this test of aes192-gcm96
func (kt KeyType) AEADSupported() bool {
switch kt {
case KeyType_AES128_GCM96, KeyType_AES256_GCM96, KeyType_ChaCha20_Poly1305:
return true
}
return false
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I added it intentionally so we don't fail if we later introduce AES-192... This does seem cleaner since the change should be localized to KeyType.
This allows the high-level, algorithm-agnostic Encrypt/Decrypt with Factory to pass in AssociatedData, and potentially take multiple factories (to allow KMS keys to work). On AEAD ciphers with a relevant factory, an AssociatedData factory will be used to populate the AdditionalData field of the SymmetricOpts struct, using it in the AEAD Seal process. Signed-off-by: Alexander Scheel <alex.scheel@hashicorp.com>
This allows passing the associated_data (the last AD in AEAD) to Transit's encrypt/decrypt when using an AEAD cipher (currently aes128-gcm96, aes256-gcm96, and chacha20-poly1305). We err if this parameter is passed on non-AEAD ciphers presently. This associated data can be safely transited in plaintext, without risk of modifications. In the event of tampering with either the ciphertext or the associated data, decryption will fail. Signed-off-by: Alexander Scheel <alex.scheel@hashicorp.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Scheel <alex.scheel@hashicorp.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Scheel <alex.scheel@hashicorp.com>
cipherboy
force-pushed
the
cipherboy-add-transit-aad-mode
branch
from
67acbfa
to
234e129
Compare
schultz-is
approved these changes
Oct 24, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Project I started during hack week, but didn't quite finish... (something something, tests) :-)
This adds a new parameter,
associated_datato be passed when using an AEAD cipher (AES+GCM, ChaCha20+Poly1305). This is authenticated, but need not be transited in ciphertext.