On 2013-02-14 22:08, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> 
> Ulrik Sverdrup wrote:
> 
>> The blowfish encryption mode is vulnerable (not to revelation of the
>> plaintext), but the encryption is not checked for integrity or
>> authenticity. This means that someone might corrupt the encrypted file
>> (hexedit or similar), and vim will decrypt it without notice of error or
>> warning.
>>
>> This attack allows someone to modfiy encrypted files so that the owner
>> doesn't notice. With sufficient tries or skill it might be possible to
>> change a file's values in a predictable way at a certain offset.
>>
>> The solution is an authenticated encryption mode. The common way to do
>> it is 'Encrypt-then-MAC' where a message authentication code is formed
>> from the ciphertext and the key. This code when matching will prove that
>> the document is unchanged and was produced by someone with access to the
>> key. This code will detect the previous attack case, and additionally it
>> allows vim to detect that the wrong password was entered. Security
>> practise says that Vim must fail with an error if the MAC does not match.
> 
> I think that a verification key will actually make it easier to crack
> the password.  Currently, when an attacker tries all kinds of passwords,
> he also needs a way to verify the decrypted text is actually readable.
> That is not so easy to do.  With a verification key the verify part
> becomes really easy and fast.
> 
> It is extremely difficult to change the file in a way that after
> decryption it is readable text.  Probably just as difficult as cracking
> the password.  When knowing that a file is only plain text, checking for
> invalid Unicode characters is probably sufficient to notice that the
> decryption failed.
> 

Using Vim 7.3 patches 1-547, this is not true, and it is trivially
testable (otherwise I would not have claimed it).

Using :set cm=blowfish  :X goodenough
I produced file A that ends with "I owe you 200 USD"

using hex editor I flipped 1 single bit to produce file B, that ends
with "I owe you 300 USD".  You can diff the two binary files by using:

diff <(xxd A) <(xxd B)

a one-bit difference in the ciphertext leads to a one-bit difference in
the plain text, and we have a false document and undedetected corruption.

To reproduce, here are files A and B:

xxd -r >A <<EOF
0000000: 5669 6d43 7279 7074 7e30 3221 4638 a780  VimCrypt~02!F8..
0000010: 332a 14a3 e680 d2dd 2003 d079 9b8a 6ca7  3*...... ..y..l.
0000020: 0e43 da8b b1bb 6aad 0f1a c38c f4ba 24ba  .C....j.......$.
0000030: 181b c7d6 9b8a 6ca7 0e43 da8b b1bb 6aad  ......l..C....j.
0000040: 0f1a c38c f4ba 24ba 181b c7d6 9b8a 6ca7  ......$.......l.
0000050: 0e43 da8b b1bb 6aad 0f1a c38c ec09 c98f  .C....j.........
0000060: 2322 0fd6 1aff 59b1 47cc a61f 5a62 c89c  #"....Y.G...Zb..
0000070: eba3 d824 ec09 c98f 2322 0fd6 1aff 59b1  ...$....#"....Y.
0000080: 47cc a61f 5a62 c89c eba3 d824 ec09 c98f  G...Zb.....$....
0000090: 2322 0fd6 1aa1 78f8 5b9b aa4c dbfb 6d56  #"....x.[..L..mV
00000a0: 32e5 962e b15c 000a f6                   2....\...
EOF

xxd -r >B <<EOF
0000000: 5669 6d43 7279 7074 7e30 3221 4638 a780  VimCrypt~02!F8..
0000010: 332a 14a3 e680 d2dd 2003 d079 9b8a 6ca7  3*...... ..y..l.
0000020: 0e43 da8b b1bb 6aad 0f1a c38c f4ba 24ba  .C....j.......$.
0000030: 181b c7d6 9b8a 6ca7 0e43 da8b b1bb 6aad  ......l..C....j.
0000040: 0f1a c38c f4ba 24ba 181b c7d6 9b8a 6ca7  ......$.......l.
0000050: 0e43 da8b b1bb 6aad 0f1a c38c ec09 c98f  .C....j.........
0000060: 2322 0fd6 1aff 59b1 47cc a61f 5a62 c89c  #"....Y.G...Zb..
0000070: eba3 d824 ec09 c98f 2322 0fd6 1aff 59b1  ...$....#"....Y.
0000080: 47cc a61f 5a62 c89c eba3 d824 ec09 c98f  G...Zb.....$....
0000090: 2322 0fd6 1aa1 78f8 5b9b aa4c dbfb 6d56  #"....x.[..L..mV
00000a0: 33e5 962e b15c 000a f6                   3....\...
EOF


Note: I didn't search or brute force this, I only counted the right byte
offset in the file and flipped a bit. I really hope I am somehow
mistaken, but I don't think I am.

Regarding quickening brute force by using a MAC, this is a false, the
MAC can have equivalent security factor to the block cipher, it should
really not be a concern.

HTH,
ulrik

PS. the password is 'goodenough' literally.

-- 
-- 
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Raspunde prin e-mail lui