Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
exhaustive tests: add recovery module
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
apoelstra committed Dec 16, 2016
1 parent 678b0e5 commit 2cee5fd
Showing 1 changed file with 135 additions and 0 deletions.
135 changes: 135 additions & 0 deletions src/tests_exhaustive.c
Expand Up @@ -26,6 +26,11 @@
#include "secp256k1.c"
#include "testrand_impl.h"

#ifdef ENABLE_MODULE_RECOVERY
#include "src/modules/recovery/main_impl.h"
#include "include/secp256k1_recovery.h"
#endif

/** stolen from tests.c */
void ge_equals_ge(const secp256k1_ge *a, const secp256k1_ge *b) {
CHECK(a->infinity == b->infinity);
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -282,6 +287,130 @@ void test_exhaustive_sign(const secp256k1_context *ctx, const secp256k1_ge *grou
*/
}

#ifdef ENABLE_MODULE_RECOVERY
void test_exhaustive_recovery_sign(const secp256k1_context *ctx, const secp256k1_ge *group, int order) {
int i, j, k;

/* Loop */
for (i = 1; i < order; i++) { /* message */
for (j = 1; j < order; j++) { /* key */
for (k = 1; k < order; k++) { /* nonce */
const int starting_k = k;
secp256k1_fe r_dot_y_normalized;
secp256k1_ecdsa_recoverable_signature rsig;
secp256k1_ecdsa_signature sig;
secp256k1_scalar sk, msg, r, s, expected_r;
unsigned char sk32[32], msg32[32];
int expected_recid;
int recid;
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&msg, i);
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&sk, j);
secp256k1_scalar_get_b32(sk32, &sk);
secp256k1_scalar_get_b32(msg32, &msg);

secp256k1_ecdsa_sign_recoverable(ctx, &rsig, msg32, sk32, secp256k1_nonce_function_smallint, &k);

/* Check directly */
secp256k1_ecdsa_recoverable_signature_load(ctx, &r, &s, &recid, &rsig);
r_from_k(&expected_r, group, k);
CHECK(r == expected_r);
CHECK((k * s) % order == (i + r * j) % order ||
(k * (EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER - s)) % order == (i + r * j) % order);
/* In computing the recid, there is an overflow condition that is disabled in
* scalar_low_impl.h `secp256k1_scalar_set_b32` because almost every r.y value
* will exceed the group order, and our signing code always holds out for r
* values that don't overflow, so with a proper overflow check the tests would
* loop indefinitely. */
r_dot_y_normalized = group[k].y;
secp256k1_fe_normalize(&r_dot_y_normalized);
/* Also the recovery id is flipped depending if we hit the low-s branch */
if ((k * s) % order == (i + r * j) % order) {
expected_recid = secp256k1_fe_is_odd(&r_dot_y_normalized) ? 1 : 0;
} else {
expected_recid = secp256k1_fe_is_odd(&r_dot_y_normalized) ? 0 : 1;
}
CHECK(recid == expected_recid);

/* Convert to a standard sig then check */
secp256k1_ecdsa_recoverable_signature_convert(ctx, &sig, &rsig);
secp256k1_ecdsa_signature_load(ctx, &r, &s, &sig);
/* Note that we compute expected_r *after* signing -- this is important
* because our nonce-computing function function might change k during
* signing. */
r_from_k(&expected_r, group, k);
CHECK(r == expected_r);
CHECK((k * s) % order == (i + r * j) % order ||
(k * (EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER - s)) % order == (i + r * j) % order);

/* Overflow means we've tried every possible nonce */
if (k < starting_k) {
break;
}
}
}
}
}

void test_exhaustive_recovery_verify(const secp256k1_context *ctx, const secp256k1_ge *group, int order) {
/* This is essentially a copy of test_exhaustive_verify, with recovery added */
int s, r, msg, key;
for (s = 1; s < order; s++) {
for (r = 1; r < order; r++) {
for (msg = 1; msg < order; msg++) {
for (key = 1; key < order; key++) {
secp256k1_ge nonconst_ge;
secp256k1_ecdsa_recoverable_signature rsig;
secp256k1_ecdsa_signature sig;
secp256k1_pubkey pk;
secp256k1_scalar sk_s, msg_s, r_s, s_s;
secp256k1_scalar s_times_k_s, msg_plus_r_times_sk_s;
int recid = 0;
int k, should_verify;
unsigned char msg32[32];

secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&s_s, s);
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&r_s, r);
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&msg_s, msg);
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&sk_s, key);
secp256k1_scalar_get_b32(msg32, &msg_s);

/* Verify by hand */
/* Run through every k value that gives us this r and check that *one* works.
* Note there could be none, there could be multiple, ECDSA is weird. */
should_verify = 0;
for (k = 0; k < order; k++) {
secp256k1_scalar check_x_s;
r_from_k(&check_x_s, group, k);
if (r_s == check_x_s) {
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&s_times_k_s, k);
secp256k1_scalar_mul(&s_times_k_s, &s_times_k_s, &s_s);
secp256k1_scalar_mul(&msg_plus_r_times_sk_s, &r_s, &sk_s);
secp256k1_scalar_add(&msg_plus_r_times_sk_s, &msg_plus_r_times_sk_s, &msg_s);
should_verify |= secp256k1_scalar_eq(&s_times_k_s, &msg_plus_r_times_sk_s);
}
}
/* nb we have a "high s" rule */
should_verify &= !secp256k1_scalar_is_high(&s_s);

/* We would like to try recovering the pubkey and checking that it matches,
* but pubkey recovery is impossible in the exhaustive tests (the reason
* being that there are 12 nonzero r values, 12 nonzero points, and no
* overlap between the sets, so there are no valid signatures). */

/* Verify by converting to a standard signature and calling verify */
secp256k1_ecdsa_recoverable_signature_save(&rsig, &r_s, &s_s, recid);
secp256k1_ecdsa_recoverable_signature_convert(ctx, &sig, &rsig);
memcpy(&nonconst_ge, &group[sk_s], sizeof(nonconst_ge));
secp256k1_pubkey_save(&pk, &nonconst_ge);
CHECK(should_verify ==
secp256k1_ecdsa_verify(ctx, &sig, msg32, &pk));
}
}
}
}
}
#endif

int main(void) {
int i;
secp256k1_gej groupj[EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER];
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -330,6 +459,12 @@ int main(void) {
test_exhaustive_sign(ctx, group, EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER);
test_exhaustive_verify(ctx, group, EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER);

#ifdef ENABLE_MODULE_RECOVERY
test_exhaustive_recovery_sign(ctx, group, EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER);
test_exhaustive_recovery_verify(ctx, group, EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER);
#endif

secp256k1_context_destroy(ctx);
return 0;
}

0 comments on commit 2cee5fd

Please sign in to comment.