[ Team LiB ] |
4.1 Representing Keys for Use in Cryptographic Algorithms4.1.1 ProblemYou need to keep an internal representation of a symmetric key. You may want to save this key to disk, pass it over a network, or use it in some other way. 4.1.2 SolutionSimply keep the key as an ordered array of bytes. For example: /* When statically allocated */ unsigned char *key[KEYLEN_BYTES]; /* When dynamically allocated */ unsigned char *key = (unsigned char *)malloc(KEYLEN_BYTES); When you're done using a key, you should delete it securely to prevent local attackers from recovering it from memory. (This is discussed in Recipe 13.2.) 4.1.3 DiscussionWhile keys in public key cryptography are represented as very large numbers (and often stored in containers such as X.509 certificates), symmetric keys are always represented as a series of consecutive bits. Algorithms operate on these binary representations. Occasionally, people are tempted to use a single 64-bit unit to represent short keys (e.g., a long long when using GCC on most platforms). Similarly, we've commonly seen people use an array of word-size values. That's a bad idea because of byte-ordering issues. When representing integers, the bytes of the integer may appear most significant byte first (big-endian) or least significant byte first (little-endian). Figure 4-1 provides a visual illustration of the difference between big-endian and little-endian storage: Figure 4-1. Big-endian versus little-endianEndian-ness doesn't matter when performing integer operations, because the CPU implicitly knows how integers are supposed to be represented and treats them appropriately. However, a problem arises when we wish to treat a single integer or an array of integers as an array of bytes. Casting the address of the first integer to be a pointer to char does not give the right results on a little-endian machine, because the cast does not cause bytes to be swapped to their "natural" order. If you absolutely always cast to an appropriate type, this may not be an issue if you don't move data between architectures, but that would defeat any possible reason to use a bigger storage unit than a single byte. For this reason, you should always represent key material as an array of one-byte elements. If you do so, your code and the data will always be portable, even if you send the data across the network. You should also avoid using signed data types, simply to avoid potential printing oddities due to sign extension. For example, let's say that you have a signed 32-bit value, 0xFF000000, and you want to shift it right by one bit. You might expect the result 0x7F800000, but you'd actually get 0xFF800000, because the sign bit gets shifted, and the result also maintains the same sign.[1]
4.1.4 See Also |
[ Team LiB ] |