Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Researchers identify first flaws in the Advanced Encryption Standard
Help Net Security ^ | 17 August 2011

Posted on 08/22/2011 5:26:12 AM PDT by ShadowAce

Researchers have found a weakness in the AES algorithm. They managed to come up with a clever new attack that can recover the secret key four times easier than anticipated by experts.

In the last decade, many researchers have tested the security of the AES algorithm, but no flaws were found so far.

In 2009, some weaknesses were identified when AES was used to encrypt data under four keys that are related in a way controlled by an attacker; while this attack was interesting from a mathematical point of view, the attack is not relevant in any application scenario.

The new attack applies to all versions of AES even if it used with a single key. The attack shows that finding the key of AES is four times easier than previously believed; in other words, AES-128 is more like AES-126.

Even with the new attack, the effort to recover a key is still huge: the number of steps to find the key for AES-128 is an 8 followed by 37 zeroes.

To put this into perspective: on a trillion machines, that each could test a billion keys per second, it would take more than two billion years to recover an AES-128 key.


Note that large corporations are believed to have millions of machines, and current machines can only test 10 million keys per second.

Because of these huge complexities, the attack has no practical implications on the security of user data; however, it is the first significant flaw that has been found in the widely used AES algorithm and was confirmed by the designers.

The AES algorithm is used by hundreds of millions of users worldwide to protect internet banking, wireless communications, and the data on their hard disks. In 2000, the Rijndael algorithm, designed by the Belgian cryptographers Dr. Joan Daemen (STMicroelectronics) and Prof. Vincent Rijmen (K.U.Leuven), was selected as the winner of an open competition organized by the US NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology).

Today AES is used in more than 1700 NIST-validated products and thousands of others; it has been standardized by NIST, ISO, and IEEE and it has been approved by the NSA for protecting secret and even top secret information.

The attack is a result of a long-term cryptanalysis project carried out by Andrey Bogdanov (K.U.Leuven, visiting Microsoft Research at the time of obtaining the results), Dmitry Khovratovich (Microsoft Research), and Christian Rechberger (ENS Paris, visiting Microsoft Research).


TOPICS: Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: algorithm; security
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 08/22/2011 5:26:18 AM PDT by ShadowAce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

2 posted on 08/22/2011 5:26:34 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
I already cracked this standard.

I don't bother with computers; I used pencil, paper and a slide rule.

3 posted on 08/22/2011 5:28:26 AM PDT by Lazamataz (SmithL stole my tagline and won't give it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Hmm—then I’ll have to find something stronger.....


4 posted on 08/22/2011 5:31:21 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
A better idea, Laz. Could you share? The post is what tells me you have the better idea. What encryption are you using to post? I never could get my pencil, paper, and slide rule to work by causing a computer post.
5 posted on 08/22/2011 5:33:09 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

If you found a serious flaw in AES (or any other encryption system commonly believed to be secure), the financial incentive to keep it secret would be enormous.


6 posted on 08/22/2011 5:35:24 AM PDT by icanhasbailout (I have no argument and can't do logic so I think I will call you a noob instead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; Lazamataz
I think Laz is about to declare April Fools. Only this time Laz is early or late. One or the other.
7 posted on 08/22/2011 5:39:44 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no-to-illegals; Lazamataz

Or both


8 posted on 08/22/2011 5:40:50 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
They just made the keyspace two bits smaller. That in itself is not such a big deal; however, once such a flaw has been found in a cipher, others, more serious ones usually follow in short order. So, we better get ready to find a decent replacement.
9 posted on 08/22/2011 5:44:53 AM PDT by cartan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; Lazamataz
That both part is the part to watch out for ... (imho) though Laz did utilize three to create four. Not sure what that means exactly but perhaps Laz will explain.
10 posted on 08/22/2011 5:45:53 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
To put this into perspective: on a trillion machines, that each could test a billion keys per second, it would take more than two billion years to recover an AES-128 key.

Note that large corporations are believed to have millions of machines, and current machines can only test 10 million keys per second.

So, all we need is a million times more computers than we already have, and they have to be 100 times faster than what we have now. Then all it will take is about 2 billion years to crack a single key? Dang, time to start working on a replacement for AES. I could probably get some porkus money to do that - it'd be about as useless as every other rat-hole our money has been poured down by that ...

11 posted on 08/22/2011 5:47:04 AM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obama now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Microsoft research has some smart people working for them.


12 posted on 08/22/2011 5:52:40 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

They’ll just bump everything up to 256-bit AES—which would be just about impossible to break.


13 posted on 08/22/2011 5:59:10 AM PDT by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cartan

Even if the algorithm is good, there may still be flaws in the implementation. The bid example this year was crypt_blowfish - the popular open source library used in implementation for the last 13 years turns out to have been only using every 4th character of a given password when creating hashes of said password. The fix turned out to be changing a simple cast of a char (which is default a signed integer) to an unsigned integer.

The flaw was out there for 13 years and nobody noticed!


14 posted on 08/22/2011 5:59:50 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I cracked the standard by waterboarding the poor bastard who knows the key ...


15 posted on 08/22/2011 6:00:44 AM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
They’ll just bump everything up to 256-bit AES—which would be just about impossible to break.

It depends on the flaw itself. For a brute-force break, you are correct. However, if the flaw involves an algorithm to break it, then just upping the bits may not be enough.

16 posted on 08/22/2011 6:06:53 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Has the attack location been pinpointed or is it multiple, which is usually the case. Witnessed an attack the other day on me, and I was surprised because I am a nobody. My being attacked was a dos. Multiple locations, multiple isps.
17 posted on 08/22/2011 6:20:55 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
> I cracked the standard by waterboarding the poor bastard who knows the key ...

And THAT is the weakness in ANY encryption.

1. If he's near you, beat the crap out of the guy with the password. OR

2. If he's at a distance, send him email phishing for it, with a sufficiently tempting hook.

Cracking AES is mathematically interesting, but the people who are actually interesting in GETTING YOUR DATA, foolish. Compared to the two simple methods above, it's silly.

18 posted on 08/22/2011 6:25:08 AM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dayglored; ArrogantBustard
> Cracking AES is mathematically interesting, but for the people who are actually interesting in GETTING YOUR DATA, foolish. Compared to the two simple methods above, it's silly.

Fixed it.

19 posted on 08/22/2011 6:26:43 AM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

The problem with that approach is that in many cases, you would like to listen in on conversations without them noticing.


20 posted on 08/22/2011 6:32:43 AM PDT by cartan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson