Skip to content

crypto: doc-only deprecate createCipher/Decipher - #19343

Closed
tniessen wants to merge 3 commits into
nodejs:masterfrom
tniessen:deprecate-createcipher-doc-only
Closed

crypto: doc-only deprecate createCipher/Decipher#19343
tniessen wants to merge 3 commits into
nodejs:masterfrom
tniessen:deprecate-createcipher-doc-only

Conversation

@tniessen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

createCipher and createDecipher are cryptographically weak and can cause severe security issues when used improperly, there are hundreds of examples on GitHub alone. There was #13941 but it was discontinued due to the author becoming inactive. Seeing that crypto.createCipher is widely used, the first step is to doc-only deprecate the pair of functions.

Another argument against having create(De|C)ipher is that they are unsupported in FIPS mode, not sure whether that's worth mentioning.

Checklist

@tniessentniessen added the semver-major PRs that contain breaking changes and should be released in the next major version. label Mar 14, 2018
@nodejs-github-botnodejs-github-bot added the doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. label Mar 14, 2018
@tniessentniessen added the crypto Issues and PRs related to the crypto subsystem. label Mar 14, 2018
@tniessen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

cc @nodejs/crypto

Comment threaddoc/api/deprecations.md Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"obtain the [`Cipher`] object" should probably be something like: "obtain [`Cipher`]/[`Decipher`] objects respectively"

@tniessentniessen added this to the 10.0.0 milestone Mar 14, 2018
Comment threaddoc/api/deprecations.md Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Micro-nit: object -> objects

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nano-nit: Remove the comma.

@lpinca

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@lpincalpinca added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Mar 16, 2018
@tniessen
tniessenforce-pushed the deprecate-createcipher-doc-only branch from 1133daf to d40b2c8CompareMarch 18, 2018 14:42
@tniessen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@tniessen
tniessen requested a review from a teamMarch 19, 2018 14:19
tniessen added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2018
createCipher and createDecipher are cryptographically weak, can cause
severe security issues when used improperly and are unsupported in FIPS
mode.
PR-URL: #19343
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <minwoo@nodesource.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
@tniessen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Landed in 81f88e3 with code DEP0106.

@tniessentniessen removed the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Mar 24, 2018
@tniessentniessen added the deprecations Issues and PRs related to deprecations. label Apr 28, 2018
tniessen added a commit to tniessen/node that referenced this pull request Sep 6, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: nodejs#13821
Refs: nodejs#19343
Refs: nodejs#22089
nodejs-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: #13821
Refs: #19343
Refs: #22089
PR-URL: #44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: #13821
Refs: #19343
Refs: #22089
PR-URL: #44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: #13821
Refs: #19343
Refs: #22089
PR-URL: #44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
juanarbol pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: #13821
Refs: #19343
Refs: #22089
PR-URL: #44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
juanarbol pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: #13821
Refs: #19343
Refs: #22089
PR-URL: #44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
juanarbol pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2022
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: #13821
Refs: #19343
Refs: #22089
PR-URL: #44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
guangwong pushed a commit to noslate-project/node that referenced this pull request Jan 3, 2023
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: nodejs/node#13821
Refs: nodejs/node#19343
Refs: nodejs/node#22089
PR-URL: nodejs/node#44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
guangwong pushed a commit to noslate-project/node that referenced this pull request Jan 3, 2023
The current documentation clearly states that createCipher() and
createDecipher() should not be used with ciphers in counter mode, but
(1) this is an understatement, and (2) these functions are
(semantically) insecure for ciphers in any other supported block cipher
mode as well.
Semantic security requires IND-CPA, but a deterministic cipher with
fixed key and IV, such as those generated by these functions, does not
fulfill IND-CPA.
Are there justified use cases for createCipher() and createDecipher()?
Yes and no. The only case in which these functions can be used in a
semantically secure manner arises only when the password argument is
not actually a password but rather a random or pseudo-random sequence
that is unpredictable and that is never reused (e.g., securely derived
from a password with a proper salt). Insofar, it is possible to use
these APIs without immediately creating a vulnerability. However,
- any application that manages to fulfill this requirement should also
be able to fulfill the similar requirements of crypto.createCipheriv()
and those of crypto.createDecipheriv(), which give much more control
over key and initialization vector, and
- the MD5-based key derivation step generally does not help and might
even reduce the overall security due to its many weaknesses.
Refs: nodejs/node#13821
Refs: nodejs/node#19343
Refs: nodejs/node#22089
PR-URL: nodejs/node#44538
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cryptoIssues and PRs related to the crypto subsystem.deprecationsIssues and PRs related to deprecations.docIssues and PRs related to the documentations.semver-majorPRs that contain breaking changes and should be released in the next major version.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants

@tniessen@lpinca@mscdex@jasnell@thefourtheye@Trott@JungMinu@BridgeAR@nodejs-github-bot