Re: [Cfrg] What groups to use for Diffie Hellman?

Peter Gutmann <> Tue, 01 November 2016 00:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8087B129AB8 for <>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 17:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.696
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.696 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id USPUumv6qxJb for <>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 17:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98B611293F4 for <>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 17:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;;; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1477961846; x=1509497846; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=V4r3j04wpjyfShahzaCi8gE4j0KBBerrpFLYlu/fskg=; b=WMnty3JL/qIwz8hCqKoAlxL8JzhxB74ZCIIpvwwA63jLyF4F3eJprI51 wFWUp4ML0p5i/ktYTvJI33ouJikaOmeCE7Hw6Sw8zgk7+KF/GNI2Gg4wu V9YtBFvm/RxRFgOY4eEU4cBwwnGEZO20vZDUUj/H4rZF+QVIHGUrfB7i3 0xZQsm1caJIqUVwgqRS19x1p/RNw0N9KHKqAVXfWrXt/blufZ6osn9gEN d7p46fAR9tSnR0tL/fssjEvXlFtc6xH6pt82Aq6EfPU7/HHJDsBM8TfjW FrP6fmTet+lBht3rBNwOljDH848Gq9+SiGAcokYDruSj1GQmzRJVxoaD1 w==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,577,1473076800"; d="scan'208,217";a="112937467"
X-Ironport-Source: - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 01 Nov 2016 13:57:25 +1300
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Tue, 1 Nov 2016 13:57:24 +1300
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Tue, 1 Nov 2016 13:57:24 +1300
From: Peter Gutmann <>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
Thread-Topic: [Cfrg] What groups to use for Diffie Hellman?
Thread-Index: AQHSMxxtY9gGeJmmR0OrS3v+ehmNA6DCVrbO//+2/QCAAUFFOQ==
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 00:57:24 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_147796184153517501csaucklandacnz_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: jonas weber <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] What groups to use for Diffie Hellman?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 00:57:28 -0000

Phillip Hallam-Baker <> writes:

>The way I got suckered into RFC5441 is that it is the only RFC that appears
>to be consistent with RFC2631 on how to do DH:

Hmm, so going back one step in the chain, how did you get suckered into using
RFC 2631?  That's a spec that's used by, approximately, nothing...

(I'd have to check what IPsec does, but it's not used by TLS, SSH, S/MIME,
PGP, or any other protocol I'm familiar with.  If you need some sort of spec
for DH then I guess it's some sort of spec, but I think a better choice would
have been the TLS form, which means you get support in crypto libs, PKCS #11,
hardware, ...).

>I see the following ways forward:

Given that 5114 is unsafe and 2631 isn't used by anything that I'm aware of, I
think a better option would be:

4) Do a draft with values created in a generally-approved NUMS manner, g = 2
   for efficiency, safe primes, etc, whose generation is verified by two or
   more generally-trusted crypto people.