|Numéro de publication||US7055029 B2|
|Type de publication||Octroi|
|Numéro de demande||US 09/949,323|
|Date de publication||30 mai 2006|
|Date de dépôt||7 sept. 2001|
|Date de priorité||3 févr. 1998|
|État de paiement des frais||Payé|
|Autre référence de publication||US6378072, US20020073316, WO1999039475A1|
|Numéro de publication||09949323, 949323, US 7055029 B2, US 7055029B2, US-B2-7055029, US7055029 B2, US7055029B2|
|Inventeurs||Thomas Collins, John Gregory, Ralph Bestock|
|Cessionnaire d'origine||Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.|
|Exporter la citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Citations de brevets (4), Référencé par (69), Classifications (19), Événements juridiques (8)|
|Liens externes: USPTO, Cession USPTO, Espacenet|
This application is a continuation in part (CIP) of and incorporates by reference U.S. application Ser. No. 09/017,759 filed Feb. 3, 1998, and titled “Cryptographic System”.
This invention relates generally to communicating data securely, and more particularly to a cryptographic system and methods of using public key cryptography.
Computer systems are found today in virtually every walk of life for storing, maintaining, and transferring various types of data. The integrity of large portions of this data, especially that portion relating to financial transactions, is vital to the health and survival of many commercial enterprises. Individual consumers also have an increasing stake in data security as open and unsecure data communications channels for sales transactions, such as credit card transactions over the Internet, gain popularity.
Protecting data stored in computer memory, tape, and disk is often important. However, just as important, if not more so, is the ability to transfer financial transactions or other communications from a sender to an intended receiver without intermediate parties being able to interpret the transferred message. Furthermore, as important transactions are increasingly handled electronically, authentication of the originator of a message must be ensured. For example, for electronic banking, there needs to be a way to authenticate that an electronic document, such as a bank draft, has actually been “signed” by the indicated signatory.
Cryptography, especially public key cryptography, has proven to be an effective and convenient technique of enhancing data privacy and authentication. Data to be secured, called plaintext, is transformed into encrypted data, or ciphertext by a predetermined encryption process of one type or another. The reverse process, transforming ciphertext into plaintext, is termed decryption. In public key cryptography, the processes of encryption and decryption are controlled by a pair of related cryptographic keys. A “public” key is used for the encryption process, and a “private” key is used to decrypt ciphertext. Alternatively, the private key may be used to encrypt the data, and the public key to decrypt it. This latter method provides a method of digitally signing data to positively identify the source of the data.
The prior art includes a number of public key schemes. However, over the past decade, one system of public key cryptography has gained popularity. Known generally as the “RSA” scheme, it is now thought by many to be a worldwide defacto standard for public key cryptography. The RSA scheme is described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,405,829.
The RSA scheme capitalizes on the relative ease of creating a composite number from the product of two prime numbers whereas the attempt to factor the composite number into its constituent primes is difficult. Pairs of public/private keys can then be found based on the factors of the composite number. A message is encrypted using a series of mathematical exponentiations and divisions based on one of the keys. If the matching key of the public/private key pair is known, the message can be decrypted using a series of mathematical exponentiations and divisions using the matching key. The composite number is a part of the public and private keys and is known to the public. However, since the private key can only be found by factoring the composite number, calculating the private key from the public key is computationally difficult.
The security of the RSA technique can be enhanced by increasing the difficulty of factoring the composite number through judicious choices of the prime numbers. (This, of course, would be true for any encryption/decryption scheme using or requiring prime numbers.) Another, and principle enhancement, is to increase the length (i.e., size) of the composite number. Today, it is common to find RSA schemes being proposed in which the composite number is on the order of 600 digits long. The task of exponentiating a number this long, however, can be daunting and time consuming, although not as difficult as factoring. Therefore, increasing the length of the composite number increases the security, but only at the expense of increased time to perform the encryption and decryption.
However, recently discovered techniques have greatly improved the efficiency with which encryption/decryption functions are performed using the RSA scheme. Rather than using two prime numbers to form the composite number conventionally employed in RSA cryptographic operations, it has been found that more than two prime numbers can also be used. In addition, it has also been found that the Chinese Remainder Theorem can be used to break an RSA encryption or decryption task into smaller parts that can be performed much faster than before.
The Chinese Remainder Theorem allows the necessary computations to be divided into two exponentiations. Commonly assigned U.S. Pat. No. 5,848,159, filed Jan. 16, 1997, which is incorporated by reference for all purposes, discloses a method of using multiple prime numbers to create the composite number and further dividing the exponentiations into multiple smaller exponentiations. However, though the encrypting and decrypting exponentiations are smaller and therefore accomplished more quickly, the factorization of the composite number is no easier to compute. So, the security of the system is not compromised.
In addition to the security of the data, another important issue with regard to cryptographic systems is the security of the system itself and processes handled thereby. In a system implementing an encryption algorithm, ensuring that the system is secure from tampering is important. One area of concern is the secure loading and storing of application programs for the system. If the application program can be altered or substituted, the security of a system may be breached.
It is therefore desirable to provide an efficient cryptographic system for implementing public key cryptography with multiple prime factors. It is also desirable to provide a cryptographic system that may be initialized to a secure state and can provide security and maximum flexibility for user application programs.
A cryptographic system is provided having a processor and a plurality of exponentiation units. The processor receives encryption or decryption requests from a host processor and divides them into one or more exponentiation tasks. These exponentiation tasks are transferred to one or more execution units that perform the exponentiation and return a value to the processor. This allows the exponentiations tasks to be performed in parallel, thereby decreasing the time needed to perform the encryption and decryption requests.
The present invention further provides a method of initializing the cryptographic system in a secure manner and enabling ownership of secure processes, such as user ownership or vendor ownership. The manufacturer (or vendor) signs the first program file, and the user signs the second program file. The first program file is configured to include the public key component of the user's private key that signs the second program file. Thus, the manufacturer can control which applications can be executed by the host of the cryptographic system (e.g., first program file) and the user (through the first program file) can control whether and which program file (e.g. second program file) can be loaded and executed.
An external memory holds a first program file along with header information, a hash value, and a digital signature in an encrypted program packet. The first program file contains a key/option table holding an RSA cryptographic public key. A processor loads the encrypted program packet and decrypts it using a cryptographic key. However, the processor executes the decrypted program file only after the processor authenticates it. If the decrypted program file cannot be authenticated, then the cryptographic (DES) keys are zeroed out, and the cryptographic system is put into a non-functioning state.
The first program file is authenticated by checking the header for proper format, computing an expected hash value of the first program file and comparing it with the hash value, and checking the digital signature with an RSA public key that is stored in the cryptographic system. The RSA public key counterpart, the RSA private key known only to the manufacturer, is used in signing the hash value to create the digital signature. In essence, ownership of the secure process starts at the manufacturer the role of which, in this regard, is akin to a certificate authority.
After authenticating the first program file, the processor executes the first program file. The first program file loads a second program file from the external memory. This second program file is generally a user-application program. It is authenticated in a similar manner to the first program file, but the digital signature is checked against the RSA public key found in the key/option table. In essence, ownership of the secure process is relinquished by the manufacturer, which does not have the user's RSA private/public key pair, and is transferred from the manufacturer to the end user.
Namely, by this initialization process, the user of the cryptographic system may load personalized application programs with secret cryptographic keys not known to anyone else. The process ensures that the application programs cannot be altered or substituted with fraudulent programs. At the same time, the manufacturer of the cryptographic system can securely provide maintenance and upgrade programs over public networks, and ensure that only properly licensed users are using the programs.
A further understanding of the nature and advantages of the inventions presented herein may be realized by reference to the remaining portions of the specification and the attached claims.
Turning now to the figures, and for the moment,
Preferably, the communicating medium connecting the host (not shown) and the cryptographic system 100 is a peripheral component interconnect (PCI) bus because, among other things, of its processor independence. However, it will be evident to those skilled in this art that other bus structures may be used, and even preferred given different host environments.
The connector 103 is coupled to a pair of processing boards 107 by a host interface 105. The processing boards 107 are each substantially identical in design and construction, so that a description of one will apply equally to the other. Each processing board 107 is separately addressable and may operate in parallel with the other.
Data is transferred between cryptographic processor 110 and cryptographic coprocessor(s) 115, and reconfigurable coprocessor 117 by a secure bus 120. Secure bus 120 carries address, control and data lines—as well as any chip select lines that may be used. To preserve the security of the cryptographic system 100, all information of a secure nature is encrypted before being placed on secure bus 120. In the specific embodiment, a DES engine, capable of DES encryption and decryption, is included in cryptographic processor 110, cryptographic coprocessor(s) 115, and reconfigurable coprocessor 117 for providing the encryption and description for secure bus 120. Of course, other types of security, other than DES may be provided, depending upon how much security is required and the resources available to provide the security.
Although the cryptographic processor 110, as will be seen, is constructed to include memory, additional memory, external to the cryptographic processor 110, is provided in the form of a flash memory 124 and a random access memory (RAM) 126. Data is transferable to flash memory 124 and a random access memory (RAM) 126 by way of secure bus 120. In the specific embodiment, flash memory 124 has two megabytes of storage capacity. Its primary use in the specific embodiment is as a repository for a user-application program. A user-application program is encrypted and stored in flash memory 124 along with information to protect it from unknown alteration. After the system is successfully booted and the user-application program loaded into cryptographic processor 110, tests are done to ensure its authenticity before control of the system is transferred to the user-application program. Details of an exemplary method of securely booting the system and loading an application program are presented below with respect to
The RAM 126 is used for the storage of both secure and unsecure data. In the specific embodiment, it is one megabyte of volatile memory.
Cryptographic processor 110 is provided with the output of crystal oscillator 155 from which it generates clock signals for its own use and for use by other components of cryptographic system 100. A battery 162 is also optionally provided to supply backup power during a power failure. Its use is not required by the present invention.
As mentioned above, the cryptographic system can be a board-level product. The board-level cryptographic system can be based on a cryptographic processor 110 such as the VMS310—NetArmor™ Encryption Processor available from VLSI Technology, Inc., in San Jose, Calif. The cryptographic system may include one or more such devices.
CPU 210 is coupled with other elements within cryptographic processor 110 by means of a data/address bus 215. Data/address bus 215 is also coupled to host interface 105 through a bus interface 217. Bus interface 217 provides a path to host interface 105, while keeping data/address bus 215 secure from unwanted monitoring. Encryption and decryption requests are delivered to CPU 210 over data/address bus 215 through bus interface 217, and the results are returned by the same path. In the specific embodiment, data/address bus 215 is a 32-bit data bus with control and address signals. Data on data/address bus 215 is not necessarily encrypted, but is kept secure from tampering with physical security that is built into the chip that prevents probing of the chip.
During its operation, CPU 210 may have its operation interrupted by certain events. An interrupt circuit 225 is provided for sensing an interrupt event and communicating the event to CPU 210. This is a common practice and a design for interrupt circuit 225 will be readily apparent to one of skill in the art.
The random access memory (RAM) 230 is typically provided for use by CPU 210 as a temporary data storage. In this embodiment, it is a two-kilobyte RAM with a 32-bit data input. It may be used for storing a user-application program upon which CPU 210 operates and as a scratchpad memory for temporary storage of data and variables. It is coupled to CPU 210 by data bus 215.
VROM 240 is what is known as a volatile ROM or VROM; it is a read-only memory that is physically secure from tampering or probing. A purpose of VROM 240 is as a repository for startup software, which is installed in the factory and may not be altered. As shown in
A device select decoder 244 operates to decode certain address ranges and provides signals to select certain external devices. Though not a necessary element of the present invention, device select decoder 244 reduces the amount of logic needed on external devices to decode addresses and to add flexibility to external devices. In the specific embodiment, device select lines are used to enable individual cryptographic coprocessors 115.
In the specific embodiment, secure bus 120 (
Before being placed on secure bus 120, data is first encrypted to make it secure by the DES bus encryption engine 250, using Data Encryption Standard, an American National Standards Institute (ANSI) approved standard for data encryption (ANSI X3.92). The DES engine 250 is configured to operate at 20 Mbytes per second and will operate in either ECB or CBC modes. Details of the DES protocol are well known in the art of cryptography and may be found, for example, in U.S. National Bureau of Standard, “Data Encryption Standard,” Federal Processing Standard (FIPS) Publication 46, January 1977. However, the present invention is not limited to DES protocol for secure bus 120. Other encryption algorithms, now known or yet to be developed, may also be used to make secure bus 120 secure.
The keys for DES encryptions performed by the DES engine 250 are generated randomly and stored by CPU 210 (e.g., as shown in
In the specific embodiment, the generated DES keys are stored in real time clock (RTC RAM) 255. As such, no one need ever know the DES keys. RTC RAM 255 is typically a small capacity RAM and has an external battery 257 for maintaining its contents during power outage.
The RSA engine 260 is a special purpose arithmetic unit designed and structured to perform fast modular exponentiation. In the specific embodiment, it performs 10 exponentiations per second on a 1024 bit value. Its design and operation will be understood by one of skill in the art. If another encryption method besides RSA public key cryptography is provided by the system, other types of arithmetic units may be provided along with or instead of RSA engine 260.
In operation, the cryptographic system 100 (
For public key RSA, the CPU 210 of the cryptographic processor 110 receiving the request will construct exponentiation tasks for execution by RSA engine 260 from the message data and the keys. RSA engine 260 performs exponentiations and returns the results to CPU 210. As described above, the encryption and decryption may be broken into one or more exponentiation tasks. These tasks can be performed in parallel to speed up the operation. The individual results of the exponentiation tasks are combined using the principles of the Chinese Remainder Theorem by CPU 210 to form the result—as described in the aforementioned patent application Ser. No. 08/085,993, which was previously incorporated by reference.
To speed up performance of the exponentiation tasks, the work may be offloaded on secure bus 120 to cryptographic coprocessor 115. Typically, cryptographic coprocessor 115 is a specialized processor capable of performing multiple exponentiations or other cryptographic calculations at a greater rate. More details regarding cryptographic coprocessor 115 will be given with respect to
The hashing engine 270 is provided as part of the cryptographic processor 110 to calculate an expected hash value for a message provided to it. The expected hash value is generally a checksum value used to verify that the message has not been altered. Other hash values, and accordingly other expected hash values, are possible without departing from the spirit of the invention. If the expected hash value matches a hash value that was generated earlier and appended to the message, then a degree of confidence is gained in the validity of the message. The amount of confidence is based upon the hash algorithm used. In the specific embodiment, hash engine 270 performs a FIPS 180-1 compliant Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA-1.) SHA-l produces a 160-bit hash value.
Hash values are appended to messages sent over secure bus 120. If the message changes en route, the hash value that is attached to the data will not match the expected hash value computed for the message at the other end.
Physical security circuits 280 are incorporated in cryptographic processor 110 to monitor the battery level and the VCC level. The physical security circuits 280 operate to detect voltage levels which tend to indicate that the chip is possibly being tampered with and provide an alarm to CPU 210. The physical security circuits 280 include VROM 282.
VROM 282 is a physically secure, non-volatile memory that is one-time programmable. As mentioned above, it is programmed by the manufacturer with the seed for generating DES keys, as well as with the public key of an RSA public/private key pair and an ICF flag (ICF stands for International Cryptography Framework). The RSA public key is in this embodiment the RSA public key given by the manufacturer (akin to certificate authority) to allow authentication, as will be later explained in conjunction with
In operation, a cryptographic coprocessor 115 receives tasks from the cryptographic processor 110 (i.e., the CPU 210) and returns results of such tasks. Data received by I/O controller router 310 is generally encrypted. If so, it is sent to the DES cell 330 for decryption before being routed to an available exponentiation cell 340. The exponentiation cell performs the exponentiation, and the results are encrypted by DES cell 330 and sent back to cryptographic processor 110. Typically, the exponentiation calculations will take much more time than the DES encryption/decryption. Therefore, having only one engine encryption/decryption (i.e., DES cell 330) does not generally cause a bottleneck to the throughput. However, if needed, multiple DES cells 330 may be provided.
The software including the red-boot program instructions is executed by a processor such as CPU 210. CPU 210 is constructed or otherwise configured so that the software in VROM 240 is automatically executed after a system reset before any other software. A purpose of this feature is to allow placing the system in a secure state and to allow operations in a secure environment (such a secure loads of proper user programs). This ensures that the end-user knows which program is executing, and that the system is properly secured before any sensitive data is allowed to be brought into the system.
VROM 240 provides physical barriers for protecting valuable memory contents such as the program instructions and secret cryptographic keys. The red-boot program in the VROM 240 operates to prepare the secure environment. In essence, the red-boot program implements/enforces a number of principle including: 1) the randomly generated DES keys protect program instructions and data variables that are external to the cryptographic processor; 2) secure program instructions are cryptographically signed by a private key before being accepted for cryptographic processor execution by the red-boot program; and 3) non secure program instructions are accepted for cryptographic processor execution only after all the DES keys have been zeroed by the red-boot program; and secure program instructions are replaced via the red-boot only after the DES keys have been zeroed.
For example, the red-boot program can securely load a program that can perform DES encryption and would require a personal signature or identification match before accepting DES keys and encryption requests. In another example, a black-boot program is securely loaded via the red-boot program (once authenticated, the red-boot program transfers control to the black-boot program). The black-boot program is then used for loading command/response type application programs. The black-boot program may require programs to be signed by a private key that is different than the private key by which the red-boot programs required application programs to be signed. Indeed there can be multiple black-boot programs, each requiring a different private key for signing an application program. In the preferred embodiment, the DES keys are not saved while power is off. The DES keys are re-generated at start-up time as a function of one or more, preferably all, of the seeds in the VROM 282, RTC RAM 255 and VROM 240. Attacking the seeds requires attack on all three memories. Hence, spreading the seeds in this way spreads the risk of attack.
If the black-boot program concept is used, the above-mentioned third principle that the red-boot program enforces will be replaced by principle 3″ enforced via the black-boot program. Namely, there is a need to prevent application programs from gain knowledge of prior secret applications (instructions and/or data). Thus, the principle implemented/enforced by the black-boot program is: 3″) secure program instructions are replaced by the black-boot program only after the DES keys are zeroed. The black-boot program would not replace itself. It would replace only the command/response application. Moreover, public/private key pair required by the red-boot program will not be changed. This means that the very first program (black-boot) must be signed by the fixed private key (required by the red-boot program). However, the public/private key pair required by the black-boot program can be updated as often as desired. Thus, a hierarchical trust relationship is formed.
At the top of this hierarchy, the red-boot program assumes control upon reset. The red-boot program can then load a black-boot program and transfer control (ownership) to such black-boot program. The red-boot program will do so only if the black-boot program has been signed by the private key required by the red-boot program (e.g., key originally required by the manufacturer similar to a key provided by a certificate authority). In other words, the manufacturer signs the black-boot program with a private key the counterpart public key of which is incorporated into the red-boot program. The public key can then be used to verify that the black-boot program was indeed signed by the manufacturer (with the private key). If so, control is transferred from the red-boot program to the black-boot program. This allows the manufacturer to use the ‘fixed’ red-boot program to be used for securely loading black-boot programs while maintaining ownership of the secure process by the manufacturer (with knowledge of the keys).
Each one of the black-boot programs can, in turn, load a user program but only if the user program is signed by the private key as required by the black-bot program. This time the private key component (the signing private key) is maintained externally where the application is generated (at the user or user application vendor). The public key component, the public key, is provided by the application user or vendor to the manufacturer and is incorporated into the black boot program code as will be further explained below. This allows user applications creator-vendor, with exclusive knowledge of it private key, to distribute its user applications securely, even over public networks. Hence, ownership of the secure process of loading and executing user applications goes to the user applications creator-vendor. Variations to the above-described process and operation are possible without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention, as will be shown in conjunction with
To that end, the cryptographic system undergoes an initialization process that establishes its ability to provide the desired secure environment. As noted before, upon reset, the red-boot program is executed by the CPU 210 in the cryptographic processor. The boot-up sequence (or initialization) goes as follows:
---> black-boot (RAM)
Referring now to
If in step 404, CPU 210 determines that it is in a secure state (using a flag in the red-boot program), in step 406 it generates its DES keys from seed values found in RTC RAM 255, VROM 282, and VROM 240. As mentioned, these keys are stored in a volatile RAM, so they must be re-generated each time the system is initialized. After generating the keys, CPU 210 proceeds to step 410 in which it loads a black-boot program from flash memory. More details of step 410 will be given below.
If CPU 210 finds that it is not in a secure state, it proceeds to step 412 in which it waits for a command from the host (not shown.) Some time later, since CPU does not have a program to execute, the host issues a command to load a program. CPU examines the command, and it determines whether the command is to load a secure program (e.g., black boot) or a normal (i.e., non-secure) program. The process for executing non-secure programs is illustrated below with respect to steps 650–685.
In order to load a secure program, the system must be put into the secure state. In step 416, the cryptographic keys are generated from RTC RAM 255, VROM 284, and the VROM 240 as in step 406. Then, in step 420, the host loads a program file 510 (
In step 424, the encrypted program packet is decrypted and verified for authenticity. In the specific embodiment, the decryption is accomplished by DES engine 250. The decrypted result, a program packet that includes the black-boot program file and additional header and trailer information, is preferably subjected to further checks before loading the black-boot program into the CPU memory. These checks are done using the header and trailer information in order to establish that the black-boot program is the proper program (uncorrupted, authorized etc.).
Digressing for the moment,
Returning to step 424 of
If the program packet format is not what is expected, the system will exit step 424 in favor of an abort mode at step 427. Here, to protect itself from unwanted intrusion, the cryptographic system 100 will erase (or zero) all cryptographic keys (i.e., the keys in RTC RAM 255) in step 427, and the cryptographic system 100 is then placed in a non-functioning state. It remains in this state, until the cryptographic system 100 is reset. Since the initialization program did not complete, nothing about the system can be assumed to be secure, so secret data should not be allowed.
If the packet format is determined to be correct, however, hash value 540, a checksum developed from the original (plaintext) form of the black-boot program file 510 is checked against that developed by the hash engine 270 after decryption. If a hash of the program file matches hash value 540, then a level of confidence that the black-boot program file has not changed may be inferred.
If, however, the hash values do not match, the initialization is aborted by exiting to step 427 to erase the cryptographic keys, as described above. Cryptographic processor 110 is then moved into the non-functioning state.
A match of hash values moves the initialization procedure to its final check where it checks digital signature 550. Digital signature 550 is created by encrypting the hash value with a private key of an RSA public/private pair. The hash value 540, developed from the program file before it is encrypted and stored in flash memory 124, is itself encrypted by the RSA scheme. The hash is encrypted (signed) using the private key of the pair and is then added to the trailer 530 of the program packet as the signature 550. In the case of the black-boot program, the manufacturer signs it with its own private key. The VROM 282 is programmed with the public key of the pair when the cryptographic system is manufactured (only the manufacturer maintains the private key component). When the program packet is decrypted, and a hash value is produced from the decrypted version of the program file 510, the accompanying signature 550 is then decrypted using the public key retrieved from the VROM 282. The decrypted result of the hash value is then compared to the created hash value. A match provides further confidence that the program packet 500, and in particular the program file 510 it contains, was indeed the intended program (black-boot) and signed by the intended source (the manufacturer).
If, however, the digital signature is incorrect, i.e., there is no match between the hash value created by the hash engine 270 and the hash that results from the RSA decryption of the signature 550, the initialization is aborted. The process proceeds to the key erasure step 427, and the cryptographic system 100 is placed in the non-functioning state 462.
Recognizing that spurious errors may occur during transmission or checking of the encrypted program packet 500, the system does not abort immediately upon detecting an error. In the specific embodiment, rather than aborting to the non-functioning state immediately upon detection of a anomaly in the checking scheme, CPU 210 makes three attempts to authenticate the program before aborting to step 427.
If the checks performed at step 424 show that the encrypted program file 510 is authentic, the black-boot program file 510 is assumed to be correct, and is then written to the RAM 230. In step 430, the keys are zeroed (or erased) and the state is set to the secure state. Then in step 435, control of the CPU 210 (and thereby the cryptographic system 100) is transferred to now RAM-based Secure_Load program 510.
Although the black-boot program may be changed from time to time, this method provides a level of confidence that the black-boot program file 510 has not been altered or replaced by a fraudulent program. This allows a great amount of flexibility, while still providing security. Furthermore, maintenance updates and black-boot program enhancements may be made by simply changing the black-boot program that is downloaded from the host.
Digressing for the moment to further describe the black-boot program, particularly as it relates to this embodiment. As mentioned above, each black-boot program can require an application to be signed by a particular private key that is unique to that black-boot program. In this case, the black-boot program is a program that may be customized for the user of the cryptographic system (typically the program creator or vendor). Namely, the black-boot program may be configured to require a user-specific or user-customized RSA private key for signing user applications associated with the particular user of the cryptographic system.
If it is properly signed, any program may be loaded. Also, since the program is signed by the private key, but may be verified by the public key, the private key does not need to be stored anywhere on the system (it is maintained externally only by it owner).
To this end, the end-user of the cryptographic system (e.g., user-application program creator, vendor or user) provides the personalized (user-customized) RSA keys and sets other options in a key/option table. These keys are unknown to anyone else. The manufacturer or vendor of the cryptographic system creates the black-boot program with an empty key/option table. That black-boot program is provided to the end-user in object form (without header, hash, signature, hash of the key/option table, and the key/option table itself). The end-user generates the key/option table so that the table contains the end-user's customized information including the public key corresponding to the end-user's private key. Notably, only the end-user knows that private key, and the manufacturer (akin to certificate authority) relinquishes ownership of the secure process when the end-user'private key is used.
Then, the end-user delivers a hash of the key/option table to the manufacturer. The manufacturer concatenates the hash to the black-boot image, hashes and signs the resulting image with the private key corresponding to the public key stored in the VROM 282 (i.e., the manufacturer's private key). The signature (combined with the header, hash, signature, hash of the key/option table, and the key option table itself) is returned to the end-user. Then, the black-boot program is downloaded into the flash memory 124 of cryptographic system 100 from the host in encrypted form, in the format shown in
The black-boot program's main function is to load other user-application programs into flash memory 124, or to start an application from flash memory 124 (if it is already there). These user-application programs may be anything the end-user may want to securely distribute, load or run. These user-application programs are encrypted using the format shown in
Referring again to
In step 608, black-boot program validates the key/option table (including by validating the signature of the key/option table as described above). In step 612, if the key/option table is valid, then the execution continues with step 614. If not, then the execution is aborted to step 427, the keys are zeroed and the cryptographic system 100 enters a non-functioning state, waiting for a chip reset.
In step 614, a decision is made on what mode the cryptographic system is operating in. The black-boot program 600 has two modes, start_up_immediate and wait_for_command. If the system is in start_up_immediate mode, then at this point the black-boot program 600 branches to step 618. In step 618, the program in flash memory 124 is authenticated using the procedure described for step 424. Notably, the RSA public key required by the black-boot program for authenticating the program is the counterpart of the RSA private key owned and known only by the end-user of the cryptographic system. If this authentication (step 618) fails three times, the DES keys are erased and the cryptographic system 100 is placed in non-functioning mode. Conversely, if the user-application program is authenticated, control of CPU 210 is transferred to the user-application program.
If the system is in wait_for_command mode, the black-boot program 500 branches to step 624 and it stays in that step until a command is issued. The commands that may be issued are init_load (initialize the system to load a program into flash memory 124), start_flash (execute the program in flash memory 124), and load_flash (load the program into flash memory 124). If the command is start_flash, the black-boot program 500 branches to step 618 and 620 to authenticate and execute the program in flash memory 124 as described above. Otherwise, an init_load command is issued.
The black-boot program provides additional security protection in verifying that the host in question is authorized to receive the distributed program (particularly useful when user-programs or updates of such programs are distributed on a public network). To that end, upon receipt of the init_load command, the black-boot program 500 checks the key/option table for the value of a challenge/response bit in step 628. If it is set, then a challenge response procedure is executed in step 632.
The challenge/response procedure involves host communication to determine that the host is authorized to load the application into flash. The black-boot program 600 generates a random number known as ChallengeID. ChallengeID is hashed and sent to the host, which attaches its own hashed random number and digitally signs them both using a private key, corresponding to a public key in the key/options table. These are sent back to the CPU 210, which decrypts them with the private key.
If the challenge response procedure fails, the black-boot program 500 is aborted to step 427, the keys are zeroed (erased) and the cryptographic system is placed in a non-functioning state. Otherwise, the black-boot program 500 branches to step 636, where it waits for a command. If the command is a load_flash command, then the program is authenticated in step 638. If it fails, the program aborts to step 427, and if it succeeds then the user-application program is stored, in the DES encrypted format of
The following is pseudocode that is appropriate for use as black-boot program 500.
Send “abb initializing” status to the host
calculate the DES_KEY from seeds
if KOT_hash is invalid
/*This a fatal error*/
clear all RTC RAM
Send “abb_kot_hash_failed” status to the host
wait for reset
END /*KOT hash not verified*/
IF STARTUP is set to start Flash image
/*We drop here if START_UP option is set to immediate mode*/
start_flash( ) /*There will be not return*/
/*The START_UP option is set to command mode*/
IF WAIT_FOR_COMMAND suboption is set
wait_for_command ( ):
IF received START_FLASH command
/*The host has to feed the correct sequence of
INIT_LOAD, LOAD_FLASHs or rely on the image to be in
start_from_flash ( )
IF received INIT_LOAD command
IF CHALLENGE_RESPONSE is not set
else errcode = challenge_response ( )
clear application area in RTC RAM
/*The application is authorized to load Flash*/
Send “abb_proceed_load” to the host
wait_for_command ( )
/*The host is responsible to issue START_FLASH and
LOAD FLASH* /
/*in correct order*/
IF received START_FLASH
start_flash ( )
IF received LOAD_FLASH
/*All addresses, sizes and other parameters are in the
mailbox/* load_block ( )
END /*Do FOREVER*/
/*The command was not recognized (it was none of
START_FLASH, INIT_LOAD*/ goto main_loop
/*We drop here if START-UP option isn't set*/
start_flash( ) /*There will be no return */
check hash and signature
IF any of these didn't check up to 3 times
erase application area in RTC RAM
send “abb_eflash” status to the host
extract entry_point out of the application header
IF APPLICATION_NAME option did not pass validation
Send “abb_ename” to host erase application area in
/*Here we actually start the secure application*/
transfer control to the entry point
Send “abb_loading” to the host
read and validate load parameters, translate addresses if
unenvelope the RAM block using ENVELOPING option
encrypt the data with the precomputed DEC key
transfer the encrypted block to Flash
Message = (RandFill | | ChallengeID)
Hash = SHA1 (Message)
Signature = RSApriv(Hash)
Response = Message | | Signature
send ChallengeID (challenge) to the host
receive the response and verify all fields
IF response . ChallengeID ! =ChallengeID
calculate hash of (RandFill ChallengeID) from response
verify signature of the hash
It can easily be envisioned that using the principles of this invention, application programs may be distributed in a variety of ways while maintaining a level of security. For example, files may be sent over networks, such as the Internet, where there is great opportunity for mischief, but the sender and receiver can have a great deal of confidence that the program that ends up running on the system has not been altered or replaced. Furthermore, a seller of software for secure systems may ensure that all systems running its software are authorized users.
Referring again to step 412, if the program to be executed is a normal program, then in step 450, CPU 210 examines the International Cryptography Framework (ICF) flag in the VROM 282. The ICF flag is set at the manufacturer, and is put in place to meet certain governmental regulations about exporting cryptographic systems.
As a note, the International Cryptography Framework, is essentially intended to allow export of products with strong cryptography, as long as a “key recovery” capability is built in. That means that the strong cryptographic keys can be exported but can't be used unless the government has the ability to break in when it needs to by going through a trusted third party that has a master key. Users of the technology for domestic transmissions would not have to submit their communications to key recovery.
If the ICF flag is set, then no program is allowed to run that is not digitally signed, even in normal mode. This prevents unauthorized programs from running, as the U.S. Government will not allow export of certain cryptographic techniques. If the ICF flag is not set, then any program may be run, even if it is not digitally signed, in normal mode.
If the ICF flag is set, then the program must be authenticated just as it is in the secure mode. Steps 655–665 are similar to steps 416 through 424 described above. However, the program file may be any program that has been properly authenticated. If it is authenticated, then in step 470, control of CPU 210 is transferred to the program. If it is not authenticated, then the keys are zeroized and the cryptographic system enters a non-functional state in step 427.
If the ICF flag is not set, then the system simply loads default keys in step 475 and loads a program from the host in step 480. The program is checked to ensure that it is correct, but no digital signature is provided. If it is correct, then it is executed in step 470, and if not then the program aborts to step 427 as described above.
Although specific embodiments of the present invention have been included herein, these are given by way of example only. The invention is not limited, except by the attached claims. One of skill in the art can readily envision variations and alternatives to the cited examples that do not depart from the spirit of the present invention. Such variations and alternatives are anticipated by this invention.
|Brevet cité||Date de dépôt||Date de publication||Déposant||Titre|
|US4926478 *||30 déc. 1988||15 mai 1990||Gruenberg Elliot||Method and apparatus for continuously acknowledged link encrypting|
|US4995082 *||23 févr. 1990||19 févr. 1991||Schnorr Claus P||Method for identifying subscribers and for generating and verifying electronic signatures in a data exchange system|
|US5343527 *||27 oct. 1993||30 août 1994||International Business Machines Corporation||Hybrid encryption method and system for protecting reusable software components|
|US5835594 *||9 févr. 1996||10 nov. 1998||Intel Corporation||Methods and apparatus for preventing unauthorized write access to a protected non-volatile storage|
|Brevet citant||Date de dépôt||Date de publication||Déposant||Titre|
|US7191341||23 janv. 2003||13 mars 2007||Broadcom Corporation||Methods and apparatus for ordering data in a cryptography accelerator|
|US7205785 *||20 janv. 2005||17 avr. 2007||Cavium Networks, Inc.||Apparatus and method for repairing logic blocks|
|US7353386 *||25 juin 2004||1 avr. 2008||Thomson Licensing S.A.||Method and device for authenticating digital data by means of an authentication extension module|
|US7370211 *||21 sept. 2001||6 mai 2008||Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)||Arrangement and method of execution of code|
|US7430759 *||29 juil. 2002||30 sept. 2008||Innominate Security Technologies Ag||Method and computer system for securing communication in networks|
|US7434043 *||23 janv. 2003||7 oct. 2008||Broadcom Corporation||Cryptography accelerator data routing unit|
|US7437574 *||5 août 2002||14 oct. 2008||Nokia Corporation||Method for processing information in an electronic device, a system, an electronic device and a processing block|
|US7565552 *||23 juil. 2003||21 juil. 2009||Audi Ag||Method for protecting against manipulation of a controller for at least one motor vehicle component and controller|
|US7568110||23 janv. 2003||28 juil. 2009||Broadcom Corporation||Cryptography accelerator interface decoupling from cryptography processing cores|
|US7600131||6 juil. 2000||6 oct. 2009||Broadcom Corporation||Distributed processing in a cryptography acceleration chip|
|US7660421 *||28 juin 2002||9 févr. 2010||Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.||Method and system for secure storage, transmission and control of cryptographic keys|
|US7660998 *||9 févr. 2010||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Relatively unique ID in integrated circuit|
|US7783886 *||24 août 2010||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Multi-level boot hierarchy for software development on an integrated circuit|
|US7996670||9 août 2011||Broadcom Corporation||Classification engine in a cryptography acceleration chip|
|US7996880||31 janv. 2010||9 août 2011||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Secure updating of integrated circuits|
|US8038239||2 déc. 2010||18 oct. 2011||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Controller for printhead having arbitrarily joined nozzle rows|
|US8116455 *||29 sept. 2006||14 févr. 2012||Netapp, Inc.||System and method for securely initializing and booting a security appliance|
|US8135132||23 déc. 2009||13 mars 2012||Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.||Method and system for secure storage, transmission and control of cryptographic keys|
|US8205094 *||28 mai 2003||19 juin 2012||Nokia Corporation||Tamper evident removable media storing executable code|
|US8295484||9 déc. 2005||23 oct. 2012||Broadcom Corporation||System and method for securing data from a remote input device|
|US8312292 *||13 nov. 2012||Viasat, Inc.||Input output access controller|
|US8327148 *||17 avr. 2009||4 déc. 2012||Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.||Mobile system, service system, and key authentication method to manage key in local wireless communication|
|US8392983||31 juil. 2008||5 mars 2013||Viasat, Inc.||Trusted labeler|
|US8429426 *||23 avr. 2013||Sandisk Il Ltd.||Secure pipeline manager|
|US8661536 *||17 mars 2010||25 févr. 2014||Microsoft Corporation||Side channel attack analysis|
|US8712057 *||21 mars 2008||29 avr. 2014||Sony Corporation||Apparatus and method for an iterative cryptographic block|
|US8892858 *||29 déc. 2011||18 nov. 2014||Intel Corporation||Methods and apparatus for trusted boot optimization|
|US9026773||1 juil. 2011||5 mai 2015||Intel Corporation||Providing a secure execution mode in a pre-boot environment|
|US9032174 *||11 févr. 2013||12 mai 2015||Fujitsu Limited||Information processing apparatus for restricting access to memory area of first program from second program|
|US9264426||14 sept. 2012||16 févr. 2016||Broadcom Corporation||System and method for authentication via a proximate device|
|US9288192||14 sept. 2012||15 mars 2016||Broadcom Corporation||System and method for securing data from a remote input device|
|US20030023846 *||12 août 2002||30 janv. 2003||Broadcom Corporation||Classification engine in a cryptography acceleration chip|
|US20030046570 *||5 août 2002||6 mars 2003||Nokia Corporation||Method for processing information in an electronic device, a system, an electronic device and a processing block|
|US20040001595 *||28 juin 2002||1 janv. 2004||Compaq Information Technologies Group, L.P.||Method and system for secure storage, transmission and control of cryptographic keys|
|US20040123096 *||23 janv. 2003||24 juin 2004||Broadcom Corporation||Cryptography accelerator data routing unit|
|US20040123119 *||23 janv. 2003||24 juin 2004||Broadcom Corporation||Cryptography accelerator interface decoupling from cryptography processing cores|
|US20040123120 *||23 janv. 2003||24 juin 2004||Broadcom Corporation||Cryptography accelerator input interface data handling|
|US20040123121 *||23 janv. 2003||24 juin 2004||Broadcom Corporation||Methods and apparatus for ordering data in a cryptography accelerator|
|US20040123123 *||24 sept. 2003||24 juin 2004||Buer Mark L.||Methods and apparatus for accessing security association information in a cryptography accelerator|
|US20040181303 *||2 déc. 2003||16 sept. 2004||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Relatively unique ID in integrated circuit|
|US20040230813 *||12 mai 2003||18 nov. 2004||International Business Machines Corporation||Cryptographic coprocessor on a general purpose microprocessor|
|US20040243810 *||21 sept. 2001||2 déc. 2004||Tom Rindborg||Arrangement and method of execution of code|
|US20040243978 *||12 janv. 2004||2 déc. 2004||Walmsley Simon Robert||Multi-level boot hierarchy for software development on an integrated circuit|
|US20040260943 *||29 juil. 2002||23 déc. 2004||Frank Piepiorra||Method and computer system for securing communication in networks|
|US20050125659 *||25 juin 2004||9 juin 2005||Thomson Licensing S.A.||Method and device for authenticating digital data by means of an authentication extension module|
|US20050216907 *||28 mai 2003||29 sept. 2005||Corinne Dive-Reclus||Tamper evident removable media storing executable code|
|US20060045309 *||14 juin 2005||2 mars 2006||Shan Suthaharan||Systems and methods for digital content security|
|US20060133604 *||9 déc. 2005||22 juin 2006||Mark Buer||System and method for securing data from a remote input device|
|US20060143472 *||23 juil. 2003||29 juin 2006||Oliver Feilen||Method for protecting against manipulation of a controller for at least one motor vehicle component and controller|
|US20070006150 *||12 janv. 2004||4 janv. 2007||Walmsley Simon R||Multi-level boot hierarchy for software development on an integrated circuit|
|US20080052755 *||28 févr. 2007||28 févr. 2008||Duc Pham||Secure, real-time application execution control system and methods|
|US20080101613 *||22 oct. 2007||1 mai 2008||Brunts Randall T||Autonomous Field Reprogramming|
|US20080170698 *||21 mars 2008||17 juil. 2008||Brant Candelore||Apparatus and method for an iterative cryptographic block|
|US20080304664 *||7 juin 2007||11 déc. 2008||Shanmugathasan Suthaharan||System and a method for securing information|
|US20090034734 *||31 juil. 2008||5 févr. 2009||Viasat, Inc.||Multi-Level Key Manager|
|US20090037631 *||31 juil. 2008||5 févr. 2009||Viasat, Inc.||Input Output Access Controller|
|US20090113146 *||17 oct. 2008||30 avr. 2009||Sandisk Il Ltd.||Secure pipeline manager|
|US20090158050 *||31 juil. 2008||18 juin 2009||Viasat, Inc.||Trusted Labeler|
|US20090319802 *||24 déc. 2009||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Key Genaration In An Integrated Circuit|
|US20100131763 *||17 avr. 2009||27 mai 2010||Eunah Kim||Mobile system, service system, and key authentication method to manage key in local wireless communication|
|US20100134541 *||31 janv. 2010||3 juin 2010||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd.||Secure updating of integrated circuits|
|US20100158247 *||23 déc. 2009||24 juin 2010||Hopkins Dale W||Method and system for secure storage, transmission and control of cryptographic keys|
|US20100177889 *||13 janv. 2010||15 juil. 2010||Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba||Image forming apparatus and encryption process control method|
|US20100238213 *||23 sept. 2010||Silverbrook Research Pty Ltd||Method for dead nozzle remapping|
|US20110228926 *||17 mars 2010||22 sept. 2011||Microsoft Corporation||Side channel attack analysis|
|US20130246728 *||11 févr. 2013||19 sept. 2013||Fujitsu Limited||Information processing apparatus|
|US20140025939 *||29 déc. 2011||23 janv. 2014||Ned M. Smith||Methods and apparatus for trusted boot optimization|
|CN103299311A *||29 déc. 2011||11 sept. 2013||英特尔公司||Methods and apparatus for trusted boot optimization|
|CN103299311B *||29 déc. 2011||29 avr. 2015||英特尔公司||Methods and apparatus for trusted boot optimization|
|Classification aux États-Unis||713/161, 713/176, 380/262, 713/193|
|Classification internationale||G06F21/72, G06F21/57, H04L9/00, H04L9/30|
|Classification coopérative||H04L9/302, G06F2221/2107, G06F21/575, G06F21/72, G06F21/572, H04L9/3247, H04L2209/125|
|Classification européenne||G06F21/72, G06F21/57B, G06F21/57A, H04L9/30F|
|7 sept. 2001||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: COMPAQ INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, LP, TEXAS
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:COLLINS, THOMAS;GREGORY, JOHN;BESTOCK, RALPH;REEL/FRAME:012157/0760
Effective date: 20010906
|19 oct. 2005||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P., TEXAS
Free format text: CHANGE OF NAME;ASSIGNOR:COMPAQ INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, L.P.;REEL/FRAME:016904/0886
Effective date: 20021001
|28 juil. 2009||CC||Certificate of correction|
|30 nov. 2009||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|10 janv. 2014||REMI||Maintenance fee reminder mailed|
|23 janv. 2014||SULP||Surcharge for late payment|
Year of fee payment: 7
|23 janv. 2014||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 8
|9 nov. 2015||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT LP, TEXAS
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.;REEL/FRAME:037079/0001
Effective date: 20151027