A Surfeit of SSH Cipher Suites

Martin R. Albrecht, Jean Paul Degabriele, Torben Brandt Hansen, K. Paterson
{"title":"A Surfeit of SSH Cipher Suites","authors":"Martin R. Albrecht, Jean Paul Degabriele, Torben Brandt Hansen, K. Paterson","doi":"10.1145/2976749.2978364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This work presents a systematic analysis of symmetric encryption modes for SSH that are in use on the Internet, providing deployment statistics, new attacks, and security proofs for widely used modes. We report deployment statistics based on two Internet-wide scans of SSH servers conducted in late 2015 and early 2016. Dropbear and OpenSSH implementations dominate in our scans. From our first scan, we found 130,980 OpenSSH servers that are still vulnerable to the CBC-mode-specific attack of Albrecht et al. (IEEE S&P 2009), while we found a further 20,000 OpenSSH servers that are vulnerable to a new attack on CBC-mode that bypasses the counter-measures introduced in OpenSSH 5.2 to defeat the attack of Albrecht et al. At the same time, 886,449 Dropbear servers in our first scan are vulnerable to a variant of the original CBC-mode attack. On the positive side, we provide formal security analyses for other popular SSH encryption modes, namely ChaCha20-Poly1305, generic Encrypt-then-MAC, and AES-GCM. Our proofs hold for detailed pseudo-code descriptions of these algorithms as implemented in OpenSSH. Our proofs use a corrected and extended version of the \"fragmented decryption\" security model that was specifically developed for the SSH setting by Boldyreva et al. (Eurocrypt 2012). These proofs provide strong confidentiality and integrity guarantees for these alternatives to CBC-mode encryption in SSH. However, we also show that these alternatives do not meet additional, desirable notions of security (boundary-hiding under passive and active attacks, and denial-of-service resistance) that were formalised by Boldyreva et al.","PeriodicalId":432261,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security","volume":"140 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

This work presents a systematic analysis of symmetric encryption modes for SSH that are in use on the Internet, providing deployment statistics, new attacks, and security proofs for widely used modes. We report deployment statistics based on two Internet-wide scans of SSH servers conducted in late 2015 and early 2016. Dropbear and OpenSSH implementations dominate in our scans. From our first scan, we found 130,980 OpenSSH servers that are still vulnerable to the CBC-mode-specific attack of Albrecht et al. (IEEE S&P 2009), while we found a further 20,000 OpenSSH servers that are vulnerable to a new attack on CBC-mode that bypasses the counter-measures introduced in OpenSSH 5.2 to defeat the attack of Albrecht et al. At the same time, 886,449 Dropbear servers in our first scan are vulnerable to a variant of the original CBC-mode attack. On the positive side, we provide formal security analyses for other popular SSH encryption modes, namely ChaCha20-Poly1305, generic Encrypt-then-MAC, and AES-GCM. Our proofs hold for detailed pseudo-code descriptions of these algorithms as implemented in OpenSSH. Our proofs use a corrected and extended version of the "fragmented decryption" security model that was specifically developed for the SSH setting by Boldyreva et al. (Eurocrypt 2012). These proofs provide strong confidentiality and integrity guarantees for these alternatives to CBC-mode encryption in SSH. However, we also show that these alternatives do not meet additional, desirable notions of security (boundary-hiding under passive and active attacks, and denial-of-service resistance) that were formalised by Boldyreva et al.
过多的SSH密码套件
本文对互联网上使用的SSH对称加密模式进行了系统的分析,提供了部署统计数据、新的攻击和广泛使用模式的安全证明。我们报告的部署统计数据是基于2015年底和2016年初对SSH服务器进行的两次全互联网扫描。Dropbear和OpenSSH实现在我们的扫描中占主导地位。从我们的第一次扫描中,我们发现130,980台OpenSSH服务器仍然容易受到Albrecht等人的cbc模式特定攻击(IEEE S&P 2009),而我们发现另外20,000台OpenSSH服务器容易受到cbc模式的新攻击,这种攻击绕过了OpenSSH 5.2中引入的对抗措施,以击败Albrecht等人的攻击。与此同时,在我们的第一次扫描中,886,449台Dropbear服务器容易受到原始cbc模式攻击的变体的攻击。积极的一面是,我们提供了其他流行的SSH加密模式的正式安全分析,即ChaCha20-Poly1305,通用加密- mac和AES-GCM。我们的证明支持在OpenSSH中实现的这些算法的详细伪代码描述。我们的证明使用了Boldyreva等人专门为SSH设置开发的“碎片解密”安全模型的修正和扩展版本(Eurocrypt 2012)。这些证明为SSH中cbc模式加密的这些替代方案提供了强大的机密性和完整性保证。然而,我们也表明,这些替代方案不满足Boldyreva等人提出的额外的、理想的安全概念(被动攻击和主动攻击下的边界隐藏,以及拒绝服务抵抗)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信