IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Cfrg] AES-SIV versus AES-GCM for Encrypted Key Data

Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com> Mon, 16 May 2016 19:35 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@marvell.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D25812D99A for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zoDPIc2UqiQL for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com (mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com [67.231.148.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E06DF12D941 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0045849.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id u4GJW4fs025950 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:24 -0700
Received: from sc-exch04.marvell.com ([199.233.58.184]) by mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 22xc8c5r93-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:24 -0700
Received: from SC-EXCH03.marvell.com (10.93.176.83) by SC-EXCH04.marvell.com (10.93.176.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:23 -0700
Received: from SC-EXCH03.marvell.com ([fe80::6cb0:4dfa:f3f3:b8b6]) by SC-EXCH03.marvell.com ([fe80::6cb0:4dfa:f3f3:b8b6%21]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Mon, 16 May 2016 12:35:23 -0700
From: Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com>
To: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Thread-Topic: AES-SIV versus AES-GCM for Encrypted Key Data
Thread-Index: AQHRr6oW+bsXIEtdmUyH2QUz4PfQUA==
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 19:35:23 +0000
Message-ID: <D35F6F11.93C3E%paul@marvell.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.4.160422
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.94.250.30]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D35F6F1193C3Epaulmarvellcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2016-05-16_09:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1604210000 definitions=main-1605160249
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/TBZoUyLUGx1Cssyhs1Q9WB04Sjs>
Resent-From: alias-bounces@ietf.org
Resent-To: <>
Subject: [Cfrg] AES-SIV versus AES-GCM for Encrypted Key Data
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 19:35:26 -0000

AES-SIV does not seem to be popular with the NSA:

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/16/11-16-0596-01-00ai-more-counters.docx

This is a key wrapping application where GCM is being recommended over SIV mode for key wrapping.

I would think that nonce/counter misuse protection would be an advantage for this type of application.

Are there any clear technical benefits to using GCM versus SIV modes?


Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email