Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
public:papers:acsac2017 [2017-12-04 19:41] – [Q&A section] xnemec1public:papers:acsac2017 [2017-12-04 19:54] – [Q&A section] xnemec1
Line 38: Line 38:
 ===== Q&A section ===== ===== Q&A section =====
  
-==Q: So what did you do?== +==Q: What did you do?== 
-A: FIXME+A: We used the fact that distributions of RSA public keys generated by cryptographic libraries are slightly biased, to measure the popularity of cryptographic libraries in Internet-wide scans.
  
 ==Q: Does it mean the biased RSA key generation methods are broken?== ==Q: Does it mean the biased RSA key generation methods are broken?==
 A: No, in general, the bias is not enough for key factorization. However, we did break the Infineon implementation in our recent paper [[https://crocs.fi.muni.cz/public/papers/rsa_ccs17 | The Return of Coppersmith's Attack (ROCA)]] A: No, in general, the bias is not enough for key factorization. However, we did break the Infineon implementation in our recent paper [[https://crocs.fi.muni.cz/public/papers/rsa_ccs17 | The Return of Coppersmith's Attack (ROCA)]]
 +
 +==Q: What libraries did you analyze? Can you tell all libraries apart?==
 +A: You can see all the analyzed sources in the following graph. Libraries in the same Group (Group number in square brackets) produce very similar distributions. The popularity of individual Groups can be measured.
 +
 +{{:public:papers:acsac2017_dendrogram.png?600|}}
 +
 +==Q: I want to know the popularity of library X, why wasn't it included? ==
 +A: To suggest other sources that we can add to our analysis, please get in touch with us. If you can also provide keys generated by hardware, open-source and proprietary libraries, we will add them to the [[https://drive.google.com/drive/u/3/folders/0B0PpUrsKytcyMllkUHJ0RkZkdzA | Collection of RSA keys from reference libraries]]