Ron Ramsay wrote:
>
> Regarding symmetric keys: in SSL, symmetric keys are generated anew per
> session (leaving aside reconnection) so it doesn't seem appropriate to
> store them in hardware. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised if OpenSSL
> expects them to be visible - I don't see this as a BAD thing.
>
No not that bad but things like the master secret are usually stored in
memory in the SSL cache.
A sufficiently fully featured PKCS#11 implementation can do SSL master
secret and key derivation and keep the SSL secrets in the library (and
maybe the hardware) and the cache would only need to have some object
handles in it. The master secret and session keys never need be actually
in memory. So whereas keeping the symmetric keys or secrets in memory
isn't that BAD (compared to private keys for example), keeping them out
is BETTER :-)
Thats all theoretical of course, you can't currently redirect this with
OpenSSL without quite a bit of surgery because the SSL key derivation
algorithms are hard coded and the symmetric stuff isn't geared up for it
either.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk/
Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior crypto engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/
Core developer of the OpenSSL project: http://www.openssl.org/
Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: via homepage.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
