Verifying Arithmetic in Cryptographic C Programs

Liu, Jiaxiang; Shi, Xiaomu; Tsai, Ming-Hsien; Wang, Bow-Yaw; Yang, Bo‐Yin

doi:10.1109/ase.2019.00058

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their verification is partial, in the sense that they show that their Montgomery ladderstep implementation matches that of Algorithm 1, but don't verify the ladder itself. Similarly, Liu et al [26] have verified several C routines of OpenSSL by compiling them to the LLVM intermediate representation, and translating that to the dedicated verification language CryptoLine.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficient Verification of Optimized Code

Schoolderman

Moerman

Smetsers

et al. 2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Code that is highly optimized poses a problem for programlevel verification: programmers can employ various clever tricks that are non-trivial to reason about. For cryptography on low-power devices, it is nonetheless crucial that implementations be functionally correct, secure, and efficient. These are usually crafted in hand-optimized machine code that eschew conventional control flow as much as possible.We have formally verified such code: a library which implements elliptic curve cryptography on 8-bit AVR microcontrollers. The chosen implementation is the most efficient currently known for this microarchitecture. It consists of over 3000 lines of assembly instructions.Building on earlier work, we use the Why3 platform to model the code and prove verification conditions, using automated provers.We expect the approach to be re-usable and adaptable, and it allows for validation. Furthermore, an error in the original implementation was found and corrected, at the same time reducing its memory footprint.This shows that practical verification of cutting-edge code is not only possible, but can in fact add to its efficiency-and is clearly necessary.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficient Verification of Optimized Code

Schoolderman

Moerman

Smetsers

et al. 2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their verification is partial, in the sense that they show that their Montgomery ladderstep implementation matches Algorithm 2, but don't verify the ladder itself. Similarly, Liu et al [25] have verified several C routines of OpenSSL by compiling them to the LLVM intermediate representation, and translating that to the dedicated verification language CryptoLine.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficient Verification of Optimized Code: Correct High-speed X25519

Schoolderman,

Moerman,

Smetsers

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Code that is highly optimized poses a problem for programlevel verification. Programmers can employ various clever tricks that are non-trivial to reason about. For cryptography on low-power devices, it is nonetheless crucial that implementations be functionally correct, secure, and efficient. These are usually crafted in hand-optimized machine code that eschew conventional control flow as much as possible. We have formally verified such code: a library which implements elliptic curve cryptography on 8-bit AVR microcontrollers. The chosen implementation is the most efficient currently known for this microarchitecture. It consists of over 3000 lines of assembly instructions. Building on earlier work, we use the Why3 platform to model the code and generate verification conditions, which are proven using automated provers. The approach is re-usable and adaptable, and allows for validation. Furthermore, an error in the original implementation was found and corrected, at the same time reducing its memory footprint. This shows that practical verification of cutting-edge code is not only possible, but can in fact add to its efficiency-and is clearly necessary.

show abstract

“…Our verification technique supports bitwise logical operations, comparators, and branches as well. See [14] for a corresponding translation from LLVM intermediate representation to CryptoLine.…”

Section: Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The unsigned CryptoLine language and its verification algorithm were proposed in [18] by extending bvCryptoLine [28]. Our gimple translation is motivated by the translator from LLVM intermediate representation to CryptoLine developed in [14]. Vale [7,10] is a tool and a high-level language for the specification and verification of assembly codes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signed Cryptographic Program Verification with Typed CryptoLine

Liu

Shi

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We develop an automated formal technique to specify and verify signed computation in cryptographic programs. In addition to new instructions, we introduce a type system to detect type errors in programs. A type inference algorithm is also provided to deduce types and instruction variants in cryptographic programs. In order to verify signed cryptographic C programs, we develop a translator from the GCC intermediate representation to our language. Using our technique, we have verified 82 C functions in cryptography libraries including NaCl, wolfSSL, bitcoin, OpenSSL, and BoringSSL. CCS CONCEPTS • Security and privacy → Logic and verification; • Theory of computation → Verification by model checking; • Software and its engineering → Formal software verification.

show abstract

Verifying Arithmetic in Cryptographic C Programs

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Efficient Verification of Optimized Code

Efficient Verification of Optimized Code

Efficient Verification of Optimized Code: Correct High-speed X25519

Signed Cryptographic Program Verification with Typed CryptoLine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About