Re: [Cfrg] possibly dumb question about the opus codec and padding

"Scott Fluhrer (sfluhrer)" <sfluhrer@cisco.com> Wed, 06 June 2012 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <sfluhrer@cisco.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 A023121F866D for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T5zslnOqYLsO for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF99B21F85A0 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sfluhrer@cisco.com; l=2012; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1339001705; x=1340211305; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:cc; bh=Sghg04Aky/sSb73y/O5cnpoPgkNcC6TxJjj/deE8hvQ=; b=NIi1EB6UZUsB2dDvZ08VH+sOBSVQYhm7kZyQbhzZwoE+ZoRTrZF0tY/p SeUXlustNScAqWdNLi69uq8fJRFd+dJS1xSwx4MFHB2dH0xhd3WfRJTJt c6O+MbEcsbGu0DPsJENpMisrtoDYTIaCtSqZ0F0/W0JWqHNhJjajxGC1Z w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAMaKz0+rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABFtDWBB4IYAQEBAwEBAQEPAR0KNAsMBAIBCBEEAQELBhcBBgEmHwkIAQEEARIIARmHZAQBC5gqn3iLGIU5YAOIQI1vjQKBZoMA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,725,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="45325694"
Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jun 2012 16:55:05 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q56Gt46C030721; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 16:55:05 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-23e.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.15]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:55:04 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 09:55:00 -0700
Message-ID: <EE0C2F9E065E634B84FC3BE36CF8A4B209A3D498@xmb-sjc-23e.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <610BE690-1A25-45A6-A1AE-65F569992484@vigilsec.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Cfrg] possibly dumb question about the opus codec and padding
thread-index: Ac1D/Scbt331AsTuSOm5+mTl66Yz1QAB75nw
References: <4FCF6F34.1040302@cs.tcd.ie> <610BE690-1A25-45A6-A1AE-65F569992484@vigilsec.com>
From: "Scott Fluhrer (sfluhrer)" <sfluhrer@cisco.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2012 16:55:04.0367 (UTC) FILETIME=[1EAB23F0:01CD4405]
Cc: cfrg@irtf.org
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] possibly dumb question about the opus codec and padding
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 16:55:08 -0000

On the other hand, if a stream cipher is so weak that it can be broken
with a bit of known plaintext, I'm pretty confident that we shouldn't
use that stream cipher in any case.

-----Original Message-----
From: cfrg-bounces@irtf.org [mailto:cfrg-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of
Russ Housley
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 11:58 AM
To: Stephen Farrell
Cc: cfrg@irtf.org
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] possibly dumb question about the opus codec and
padding

I'd encourage the documentation of the concerns with known plaintext
(the zero pad) and a poor stream cipher.  It seems like a simple
sentence or two in the Security Considerations section.

Russ


On Jun 6, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> 
> Hiya,
> 
> I'm reviewing the opus codec spec [1] for this week's
> IESG telechat.
> 
> On p20, they say to zero out padding bits to avoid a covert
> channel.
> 
> Now I don't know how often that might happen, nor for how
> many bits (its a complicated beast;-) but I wondered if
> there's a possible problem there if the resulting encoded
> bits are stream-enciphered with a not-quite-good-enough
> cipher and for whatever reason there's a lot of padding.
> 
> I could ask 'em to say "pad randomly if these may be
> stream enciphered since you can hide the covert channel
> in the ciphertext nicely in any case" but it may be
> hard to know from within the codec if a stream cipher
> will be used elsewhere in the stack. Or, perhaps I
> could suggest they add a warning that these zero'd
> padding bits would be problematic if you use a crap
> stream cipher, but then that's motherhood/apple-pie
> and would be ignored, buried as it is within the bowels
> of a 331 page spec.
> 
> Any thoughts? (Most usefully before 1530 UTC tomorrow:-)
> 
> Ta,
> S.
> 
> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-codec-opus-14

_______________________________________________
Cfrg mailing list
Cfrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg