Re: Possible packages - seccure

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 09:12:13PM +0200, Ulf Harnhammar wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 01:51:48PM +0100, James Westby wrote:
> > 2) I have an ITP[3] open for seccure[4]. I would be interested in an
> >    audit of the code.
> 
> I have audited it now. I looked for the normal problems like buffer
> overflows, format string bugs and NULL dereferencing without finding
> any bugs at all. It's all well-written code by someone clueful. I don't
> know very much about cryptography, so I have no idea whether the
> program's encryption is easy to break or not.

I've looked at the underlying primitives, but not their implementation.
In short, if they are actually implemented properly[0], they are
secure[1].

The long version (you can skip this) is that the signature is ECDSA (DSA
over elliptic curve) and the encryption is ECIES (Elliptic Curve
Integrated Encryption Scheme).  Both are based on the Diffie-Hellman
problem, which is what regular DSA is based on.  DSA and Elgamal are
what most people use for signing and encryption in OpenPGP, and they are
presently considered secure.  The benefit to elliptic curve cryptography
is that the keys are smaller and it can be faster.  Instead of
multiplying or exponentiating, you can add or multiply points on the
curve.  The curve is such that adding two points will always produce a
third point on the curve.

The only other concern of mine is the method for creating keys.  If the
underlying curves are the ANSI standard curves, they are secure, but
patented.  That is part of the reason that GnuPG nor the OpenPGP
standard include ECC algorithms.  Someone may want to look at the curves