Network Working Group P. M. Hallam-Baker
Internet-Draft ThresholdSecrets.com
Intended status: Informational 2 November 2020
Expires: 6 May 2021
Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves
draft-hallambaker-threshold-04
Abstract
Threshold cryptography operation modes are described with application
to the Ed25519, Ed448, X25519 and X448 Elliptic Curves. Threshold
key generation allows generation of keypairs to be divided between
two or more parties with verifiable security guaranties. Threshold
decryption allows elliptic curve key agreement to be divided between
two or more parties such that all the parties must co-operate to
complete a private key agreement operation. The same primitives may
be applied to improve resistance to side channel attacks. A
Threshold signature scheme is described in a separate document.
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/
(http://whatever)Discussion of this draft should take place on the
CFRG mailing list (cfrg@irtf.org), which is archived at .
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 6 May 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.1. Cloud control of decryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.2. Device Onboarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.3. Cryptographic co-processor . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.4. Side Channel Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2. Defined Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3. Related Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Threshold Cryptography in Diffie-Hellman . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1. Application to Diffie Hellman (not normative) . . . . . . 8
3.2. Threshold decryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.1. Direct Key Splitting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.2. Direct Decryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3. Direct threshold key generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3.1. Device Provisioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.3.2. Key Rollover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.3.3. Host Activation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3.4. Separation of Duties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.4. Side Channel Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4. Shamir Secret Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.1. Shamir secret share generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2. Lagrange basis recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.3. Verifiable Secret Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.4. Distributed Key Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5. Application to Elliptic Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1. Implementation for Ed25519 and Ed448 . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1.1. Ed25519 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.2. Ed448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2. Implementation for X25519 and X448 . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.1. Point Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.2. X25519 Point Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.3. X448 Point Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.4. Point Addition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.5. Montgomery Ladder with Coordinate Recovery . . . . . 20
6. Test Vectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.1. Threshold Key Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.1.1. X25519 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
6.1.2. X448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.1.3. Ed25519 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.1.4. Ed448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.2. Threshold Decryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2.1. Direct Key Splitting X25519 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2.2. Direct Decryption X25519 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.2.3. Direct Key Splitting X448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.2.4. Direct Decryption X448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6.2.5. Shamir Secret Sharing X448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
6.2.6. Lagrange Decryption X448 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.1. Complacency Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.2. Rogue Key Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
10. Appendix A: Calculating Lagrange coefficients . . . . . . . . 38
11. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
12. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
1. Introduction
Public key cryptography provides greater functionality than symmetric
key cryptography by introducing separate keys for separate roles.
Knowledge of the public encryption key does not provide the ability
to decrypt. Knowledge of the public signature verification key does
not provide the ability to sign. Threshold cryptography extends the
scope of traditional public key cryptography with further separation
of roles by splitting the private key. This allows greater control
of (e.g.) decryption operations by requiring the use of two
decryption key shares rather than just the decryption key.
This document describes threshold modes for decryption and key
generation for the elliptic curves described in [RFC7748] and
[RFC8032]. Both schemes are interchangeable in their own right but
require minor modifications to the underlying elliptic curve systems
to encode the necessary information in the public (X25519/X448) or
private key (Ed25519/Ed448). The companion document
[draft-hallambaker-threshold-sigs] describes a threshold mode for
[RFC8032] signatures.
In its most general form, threshold cryptography allows a private key
to be divided between (_n_, _t_) shares such that _n_ is the total
number of shares created and _t_ is the threshold number of shares
required to perform the operation. For most applications however,
the number of shares is the same as the threshold (_n_ = _t_) and the
most common case is (_n_ = _t_ = 2).
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
This document sets out the principles that support the definition
threshold modes in elliptic curve Diffie Hellman system first using
simple additive key sharing, an approach which is limited to the case
(_n_ = _t_). The use of Shamir secret sharing [Shamir79] is then
described to support the case (_n_ > _t_). For convenience, we refer
to the non Shamir secret sharing case as 'direct key sharing'.
1.1. Applications
Development of the threshold modes described in this document and the
companion document [draft-hallambaker-threshold-sigs] were motivated
by the following applications.
1.1.1. Cloud control of decryption
The security of data at rest is of increasing concern in enterprises
and for individual users. Transport layer security such as TLS and
SSH provide effective confidentiality controls for data in motion but
not for data at rest.
Of particular concern is the case in which a large store of
confidential data is held on a server. Encryption provides a simple
and effective means of protecting the confidentiality of such data.
But the real challenge is how to effect decryption of the data on
demand for the parties authorized to access it.
Storing the decryption keys on the server that holds the data
provides no real security advantage as any compromise that affects
the server is likely to result in disclosure of the keys. Use of
end-to-end security in which each document is encrypted under the
public key of each person authorized to access it provides the
desired security but introduces a complex key management problem and
provides no effective means of revoking access after it is granted.
Threshold encryption allows a key service to control decryption of
stored data without having the ability to decrypt. The data
decryption key is split into two (or more) parts with a different
split being created for each user. One decryption share is held at
the server allowing it to control access to the data without being
able to decrypt. The other decryption share is encrypted under the
public encryption key of the corresponding user allowing them to
decrypt the stored data but only with the co-operation of the key
service.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
1.1.2. Device Onboarding
The term 'onboarding' is used to refer to the configuration of a
device for use by a particular user or within a particular
enterprise. One of the typical concerns of onboarding is to
initialize the device with a set of public key pairs for various
purposes and to issue credentials (e.g. PKIX certificates) to enable
their use.
One of the concerns that arises in such cases is whether keys should
be generated on the device on which they are to be used or on another
device administering the onboarding process.
Both approaches are unsatisfactory. While generation of keys on the
device on which they are to be used is generally preferred,
experience has shown that many devices, particularly IoT devices use
insufficiently random processes to generate such keys and this has
led to numerous cases of duplicate and otherwise weak keys being
discovered in running systems.
Generation of keys on an administration device and transferring them
to the device on which they are to be used means that the
administration device used for key generation represents a single
point of failure. Compromise of this device or of the means used to
install the keys will lead to compromise of the device.
Threshold key generation allows the advantages of both approaches to
be realized avoiding dependence on either the target device or the
administration device.
1.1.3. Cryptographic co-processor
Most real-world compromises of cryptographic security systems involve
the disclosure of a private key. Common means of disclosure being
inadvertent inclusion in backup tapes, keys being stored on public
file shares and (increasingly) keys being inadvertently uploaded to
source code management systems.
A new and emerging set of key disclosure threats come from the recent
generation of hardware vulnerabilities being discovered in CPUs
including ROWHAMMER and SPECTRE.
The advantages of Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) for storing and
using private keys are well established. An HSM allows a private key
to be used in an isolated environment that is designed to be
resistant to side channel attacks.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Regrettably, the 'black box' nature of HSMs means that their use
introduces a new security concern - the possibility that the device
itself has been compromised during manufacture or in the supply
chain.
Threshold approaches allows a key exchange or signature operation to
be divided between two private keys, one of which is generated by the
application that is to use it and the other of which is tightly bound
to a specific host such that it cannot be extracted.
1.1.4. Side Channel Resistance
The same techniques that make threshold cryptography possible are the
basis for Kocher's side-channel resistance technique [Kocher96].
Differential side channel attacks are a powerful tool capable of
revealing a private key value that is used repeatedly in practically
any algorithm. The claims made with respect to 'constant time'
algorithms such as the Montgomery ladder depend upon the actual
implementation performing operations in constant time.
2. Definitions
This section presents the related specifications and standard, the
terms that are used as terms of art within the documents and the
terms used as requirements language.
2.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2.2. Defined Terms
The following terms are used as terms of art in this document and the
accompanying specification [draft-hallambaker-threshold-sigs].
Dealer A party that coordinates the actions of a group of
participants performing a threshold operation.
Multi-Encryption The use of multiple decryption fields to allow a
document encrypted under a session key to be decrypted by multiple
parties under different decryption keys.
Multi-Encryption allows a document to be shared with multiple
recipients but does not allow the decryption role to be divided
between multiple parties.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Multi-Signatures The use of multiple independently verifiable
digital signatures to authenticate a document.
Multi-Signatures allow separation of the signing roles and thus
achieve a threshold capability. But they are not true threshold
signatures as the set of signers is visible to external parties.
Onboarding The process by which an embedded device is provisioned
for deployment in a local network.
Threshold Key Generation An aggregate public, private key pair is
constructed from a set of contributions such that the private key
is a function of the private key of all the contributions.
A Threshold Key Generation function is auditable if and only if
the public component of the aggregate key can be computed from the
public keys of the contributions alone.
Threshold Decryption Threshold decryption divides the decryption
role between two or more parties.
Threshold Key Agreement A bilateral key agreement exchange in which
one or both sides present multiple public keys and the key
agreement value is a function of all of them.
This approach allows a party to present multiple credentials in a
single exchange, a de
Threshold Signatures Threshold signatures divide the signature role
between two or more parties in such a way that the parties and
their roles is not visible to an external observer.
2.3. Related Specifications
This document extends the elliptic curve cryptography systems
described in [RFC7748] and [RFC8032] to provide threshold
capabilities.
This work was originally motivated by the requirements of the
Mathematical Mesh [draft-hallambaker-mesh-architecture].
Threshold modes for generating signatures compatible with [RFC8032]
are described in [draft-hallambaker-threshold-sigs].
2.4. Implementation Status
The implementation status of the reference code base is described in
the companion document [draft-hallambaker-mesh-developer].
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
3. Threshold Cryptography in Diffie-Hellman
The threshold modes described in this specification are made possible
by the fact that Diffie Hellman key agreement and elliptic curve
variants thereof support properties we call the Key Combination Law
and the Result Combination Law.
Let {_X_, _x_}, {_Y_, _y_}, {_A_, _a_} be {public, private} key pairs
and r [.] S represent the Diffie Hellman operation applying the
private key r to the public key S.
The Key Combination law states that we can define an operator [x]
such that there is a keypair {_Z_, _z_} such that:
_Z_ = _X_ [x] _Y_ and _z_ = (_x_ + _y_) mod _o_ (where _o_ is the
order of the group)
The Result Combination Law states that we can define an operator [+]
such that:
(_x_ [.] _A_) [+] (_y_ [.] _A_) = (_z_ [.] _A_) = (_a_ [.] _Z_)
It will be noted that each of these laws is interchangeable. The
output of the key combination law to a Diffie Hellman key pair is a
Diffie Hellman key pair and the output of the result combination law
is a Diffie Hellman result. This allows modular and recursive
application of these principles.
3.1. Application to Diffie Hellman (not normative)
Diffie Hellman in a modular field provides a concise demonstration of
the key combination and result combination laws [RFC2631]. The
realization of the threshold schemes in a modular field is outside
the scope of this document.
For the Diffie Hellman system in a modular field p, with exponent e:
* r [.] S = S^(r) mod p
* o = p-1
* _A_[x] _B_ = _A_[.] _B_ = _AB_mod _p_.
_Proof:_
Let z = x + y
By definition, X = e^(x) mod p, Y = e^(y) mod p, and Z = e^(z)mod p.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Therefore,
Z = e^(z) mod p = e^(x+y) mod p
= (e^(x)e^(y)) mod p
= e^(x)mod p.e^(y) mod p
= X.Y
Moreover, A = e^(a) mod p,
Therefore,
(A^(x) mod p).(A^(y) mod p) = (A^(x)A^(y)) mod p)
= (A^(x+y)) mod p)
= A^(z) mod p
= e^(az) mod p
= (e^(z))^(a) mod p
= Z^(a) mod p
Since e^(o) mod p = 1, the same result holds for z = (x + y) mod o
since e^(x+y+no) = e^(x+y).e^(no) = e^(x+y).1 = e^(x+y).
3.2. Threshold decryption
Threshold decryption allows a decryption key to be divided into two
or more parts, allowing these roles to be assigned to different
parties. This capability can be employed within a machine to divide
use of a private key between an implementation running in the user
mode and a process running in a privileged mode that is bound to the
machine. Alternatively, threshold cryptography can be employed to
The key combination law and result combination law provide a basis
for threshold decryption.
3.2.1. Direct Key Splitting
We begin by creating a base key pair { X, x }. The public component X
is used to perform encryption operations by means of a key agreement
against an ephemeral key in the usual fashion. The private component
x may be used for decryption in the normal fashion or to provide the
source material for a key splitting operation.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
To split the base key into n shares { S_(1), s_(1) }, { S_(2), s_(2)
}, ... { S_(n), s_(n) }, we begin by generating the first n-1 private
keys in the normal fashion. It is not necessary to generate the
corresponding public keys as these are not required.
The private key of the final key share s_(n) is given by:
_s_(n) = (x - s1 - s2 - ... - sn-1) mod o_
Thus, the base private key x is equal to the sum of the private key
shares modulo the group order.
3.2.2. Direct Decryption
To encrypt a document, we first generate an ephemeral key pair { Y, y
}. The key agreement value e^(xy) is calculated from the base public
key X = e^(x) and the ephemeral private key y. A key derivation
function is then used to obtain the session key to be used to encrypt
the document under a symmetric cipher.
To decrypt a document using the threshold key shares, each key share
holder first performs a Diffie Hellman operation using their private
key on the ephemeral public key. The key shares are then combined
using the result combination law to obtain the key exchange value
from which the session key is recovered.
The key contribution c_(i) for the holder of the i^(th) key share is
calculated as:
c_(i) = Y^(si)
The key agreement value is thus
A = c_(1) . c_(2) . ... . c_(n)
This value is equal to the encryption key agreement value according
to the group law.
3.3. Direct threshold key generation
The key combination law allows an aggregate private key to be derived
from private key contributions provided by two or more parties such
that the corresponding aggregate public key may be derived from the
public keys corresponding to the contributions. The resulting key
generation mechanism is thus, auditable and interoperable.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
3.3.1. Device Provisioning
Auditable Threshold Key Generation provides a simple and efficient
means of securely provisioning keys to devices. This is encountered
in the IoT space as a concern in 'onboarding' and in the provisioning
of unique keys for use with cryptographic applications (e.g. SSH, S/
MIME, OpenPGP, etc.).
Consider the case in which Alice purchases an IoT connected Device D
which requires a unique device key pair _{ X , x }_ for its
operation. The process of provisioning (aka 'onboarding') is
performed using an administration device. Traditional key pair
generation gives us three options:
* Generate and install a key pair during manufacture.
* Generate a new key pair during device provisioning.
* Generate a key pair on the administration device and transfer it
to the device being provisioned.
The first approach has the obvious disadvantage that the manufacturer
has knowledge of the private key. This represents a liability for
both the user and the manufacturer. Less obvious is the fact that
the second approach doesn't actually provide a solution unless the
process of generating keys on the device is auditable. The third
approach is auditable with respect to the device being provisioned
but not with respect to the administration device being used for
provisioning. If that device were to be compromised, so could every
device it was used to provision.
Threshold key generation allows the administration device and the
joining device being provisioned to jointly provision a key pair as
follows:
* The joining device has public, private key pair_{ D, d }_.
* A provisioning request is made for the device which includes the
joining device public key _D_.
* The administration device generates a key pair contribution _{ A,
a }_.
* The administration device private key is transmitted to the Device
by means of a secure channel.
* The joining device calculates the aggregate key pair _{ A [x] D,
a+d }_.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
* The administration device authorizes the joining device to
participate in the local network using the public key _A [x] D_.
The Device key pair MAY be installed during manufacture or generated
during provisioning or be derived from a combination of both using
threshold key generation recursively. The provisioning request MAY
be originated by the device or be generated by a purchasing system.
Note that the provisioning protocol does not require either party to
authenticate the aggregate key pair. The protocol provides security
by ensuring that both parties obtain the correct results if and only
if the values each communicated to the other were correct.
Out of band authentication of the joining device public key _D_ is
sufficient to prevent Man-in-the-Middle attack. This may be achieved
by means of a QR code printed on the device itself that discloses or
provides a means of obtaining _D._
[Note add serious warning that a party providing a private
contribution MUST make sure they see the public key first. Otherwise
a rogue key attack is possible. The Mesh protocols ensure that this
is the case but other implementations may overlook this detail.]
3.3.2. Key Rollover
Traditional key rollover protocols in PKIX and other PKIs following
the Kohnfelder model, require a multi-step interaction between the
key holder and the Certificate Authority.
Threshold key generation allows a Certificate Authority to implement
key rollover with a single communication:
Consider the case in which the service host has a base key pair { B ,
b }. A CA that has knowledge of the Host public key B may generate a
certificate for the time period _t_ with a fresh key as follows:
* Generate a key pair contribution { A_(t), a_(t) }.
* Generate and sign an end entity certificate C_(t) for the key B
[x] A_(t).
* Transmit C_(t), a_(t) to the host by means of a secure channel
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
3.3.3. Host Activation
Modern Internet service architectures frequently make use of short
lived, ephemeral hosts running on virtualized machines. Provisioning
cryptographic material in such environments is a significant
challenge and especially so when the underlying hardware is a shared
resource.
The key rollover approach described above provides a means of
provisioning short lived credentials to ephemeral hosts that
potentially avoids the need to build sensitive keys into the service
image or configuration.
3.3.4. Separation of Duties
Threshold key generation provides a means of separating
administration of cryptographic keys between individuals. This
allows two or more administrators to control access to a private key
without having the ability to use it themselves. This approach is of
particular utility when used in combination with threshold
decryption. Alice and Bob can be granted the ability to create key
contributions allowing a user to decrypt information without having
the ability to decrypt themselves.
3.4. Side Channel Resistance
Side-channel attacks, present a major concern in the implementation
of public key cryptosystems. Of particular concern are the timing
attacks identified by Paul Kocher [Kocher96] and related attacks in
the power and emissions ranges. Performing repeated observations of
the use of the same private key material provides an attacker with
considerably greater opportunity to extract the private key material.
A simple but effective means of defeating such attacks is to split
the private key value into two or more random shares for every
private key operation and use the result combination law to recover
the result.
The implementation of this approach is identical to that for
Threshold Decryption except that instead of giving the key shares to
different parties, they are kept by the party performing the private
key operation.
While this approach doubles the number of private key operations
required, the operations MAY be performed in parallel. Thus avoiding
impact on the user experience.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
4. Shamir Secret Sharing
The direct threshold modes described above may be extended to support
the case (_n_ > _t_) through application of Shamir secret sharing and
the use of the Lagrange basis to recover the secret value.
Shamir Secret Sharing makes use of the fact that a polynomial of
degree t-1 is defined by t points on the curve. To share a secret
_s_, we construct a polynomial of degree _t-1_ in the modular field
_L_ where _L_ > _s_.
_f_(_x_) = _s_ + _a_(1)_._x_ + _a_(2)_._x^(2)_ + ...
_a_(t-1)_._x^(t-1)_ mod _L_
The shares _p_(1)_, _p_(2)_ ... _p_(n)_ are given by the values
_f_(_x_(1)_), _f_(_x_(2)_), ... ,_f_(_x_(n)_) where _x_(1)_, _x_(2)_
... _x_(n)_ are in the range 1 _x_(i)_ _L_.
We can use the Lagrange basis function to construct a set of
coefficients l_(1), l_(2), ... l_(t) from a set of _t_ shares p_(1),
p_(2) ... p_(t) such that:
_s_ = l_(1)p_(1) + l_(2)p_(2) + ... + l_(t)p_(t) mod _L_
Thus, if we choose the sub-group order of the curve as the value of
_L_, the formula used to recover the secret _s_ is a sum of terms as
was used for the case where _n_ = _t_. We can thus apply a set of
Lagrange coefficients provided by the dealer to the secret shares to
extend the threshold operations to the case where _n_ > _t_.
4.1. Shamir secret share generation
To create _n_ shares for the secret _s_ with a threshold of _t_, the
dealer constructs a polynomial of degree _t_ in the modular field
_L_, where _L_ is the order of the curve sub-group:
f(x) = a_(0) + a_(1).x + a_(2).x^(2) + ... a_(t).x^(t-1) mod L
where a_(0) = s
a_(1) ... a_(t) are randomly chosen integers in the range 1 a_(i)
L
The values of the key shares are the values _f_(x_(1)), _f_(x_(2)),
... ,_f_(x_(n)). That is
p_(i) = _f_(x_(i))
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
where p_(1) ... p_(n) are the private key shares
x_(1) ... x_(n) are distinct integers in the range 1 x_(i) L
The means of constructing distinct values x_(1) ... x_(n) is left to
the implementation. It is not necessary for these values to be
secret.
4.2. Lagrange basis recovery
Given _n_ shares (_x_(0)_, _y_(0)_), (_x_(1)_, _y_(1)_), ...
(_x_(n-1)_, _y_(n-1)_), The corresponding the Lagrange basis
polynomials _l_(0)_, _l_(1)_, .. _l_(n-1)_ are given by:
l_(m) = ((_x_ - _x_(m0)_) / (_x_(m)_ - x__(m0)_)) . ((_x_ - _x_(m1)_)
/ (_x_(m)_ - x__(m1)_)) . ... . ((_x_ - _x_(mn-2)_) / (_x_(m)_ -
_x_(mn-)_2))
Where the values _m_(0)_, _m_(1)_, ... _m_(n-2)_, are the integers 0,
1, .. _n_-1, excluding the value _m_.
These can be used to compute _f(x)_ as follows:
_f_(_x_) = _y_(0)l0 + y1l1 + ... yn-1ln-1_
Since it is only the value of _f(_0_)_ that we are interested in, we
compute the Lagrange basis for the value _x_ = 0:
_lz_(m)_ = ((_x_(m1)_) / (_x__(m) - _x_(m1)_)) . ((_x_(m2)_) /
(_x_(m)_ - _x_(m2)_))
Hence,
_a_(0)_ = _f_(_0_) = _y_(0)lz0 + y1lz1 + ... yn-1ln-1_
4.3. Verifiable Secret Sharing
The secret share generation mechanism described above allows a
private key to be split into _n_ shares such that _t_ shares are
required for recovery. While this supports a wide variety of
applications, there are many cases in which it is desirable for
generation of the private key to be distributed.
Feldman's Verifiable Secret Sharing (VSS) Scheme provides a mechanism
that allows the participants in a distributed generation scheme to
determine that their share has been correctly formed by means of a
commitment.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
To generate a commitment the dealer generates the polynomial _f_(_x_)
as before and in addition selects a generator _g_
[TBS]
4.4. Distributed Key Generation
[TBS]
5. Application to Elliptic Curves
For elliptic curve cryptosystems, the operators [x] and [.] are point
addition.
Implementing a robust Key Co-Generation for the Elliptic Curve
Cryptography schemes described in [RFC7748] and [RFC8032] requires
some additional considerations to be addressed.
* The secret scalar used in the EdDSA algorithm is calculated from
the private key using a digest function. It is therefore
necessary to specify the Key Co-Generation mechanism by reference
to operations on the secret scalar values rather than operations
on the private keys.
* The Montgomery Ladder traditionally used to perform X25519 and
X448 point multiplication does not require implementation of a
function to add two arbitrary points. While the steps required to
create such a function are fully constrained by [RFC7748], the
means of performing point addition is not.
5.1. Implementation for Ed25519 and Ed448
[RFC8032] provides all the cryptographic operations required to
perform threshold operations and corresponding public keys.
The secret scalars used in [RFC8032] private key operations are
derived from a private key value using a cryptographic digest
function. This encoding allows the inputs to a private key
combination to be described but not the output. Contrawise, the
encoding allows the inputs to a private key splitting operation to be
described but not the output
It is therefore necessary to provide an alternative representation
for the Ed25519 and Ed448 private keys. Moreover, the signature
algorithm requires both a secret scalar and a prefix value as inputs.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Since threshold signatures are out of scope for this document and
[RFC8032] does not specify a key agreement mechanism, it suffices to
specify the data formats required to encode private key values
generated by means of threshold key generation.
5.1.1. Ed25519
Let the inputs to the threshold key generation scheme be a set of 32
byte private key values _P_(1), P2 ... Pn. For each private key
value i in turn:_
0. Hash the 32-byte private key using SHA-512, storing the digest in
a 64-octet large buffer, denoted_h_(i)_. Let n_(i) be the first
32 octets of h_(i) and m_(i) be the remaining 32 octets of h_(i).
1. Prune n_(i): The lowest three bits of the first octet are
cleared, the highest bit of the last octet is cleared, and the
second highest bit of the last octet is set.
2. Interpret the buffer as the little-endian integer, forming a
secret scalar s_(i).
The private key values are calculated as follows:
The aggregate secret scalar value _s_(a) = s1 + s2 + ... sn mod L,
where L is the order of the curve._
The aggregate prefix value is calculated by either
* Some function TBS on the values m_(1), m_(2), ... m_(n), or
* Taking the SHA256 digest of s_(a).
The second approach is the simplest and the most robust. It does
however mean that the prefix is a function of the secret scalar
rather than both being functions of the same seed.
5.1.2. Ed448
Let the inputs to the threshold key generation scheme be a set of 57
byte private key values _P_(1), P2 ... Pn. For each private key
value i in turn:_
0. Hash the 57-byte private key using SHAKE256(x, 114), storing the
digest in a 114-octet large buffer, denoted_h_(i)_. Let n_(i) be
the first 57 octets of h_(i) and m_(i) be the remaining 57 octets
of h_(i).
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
1. Prune n_(i): The two least significant bits of the first octet
are cleared, all eight bits the last octet are cleared, and the
highest bit of the second to last octet is set.
2. Interpret the buffer as the little-endian integer, forming a
secret scalar s_(i).
The private key values are calculated as follows:
The aggregate secret scalar value _s_(a) = s1 + s2 + ... sn mod L,
where L is the order of the curve._
The aggregate prefix value is calculated by either
* Some function TBS on the values m_(1), m_(2), ... m_(n), or
* Taking the SHAKE256(x, 57) digest of s_(a).
The second approach is the simplest and the most robust. It does
however mean that the prefix is a function of the secret scalar
rather than both being functions of the same seed.
5.2. Implementation for X25519 and X448
[RFC7748] defines all the cryptographic operations required to
perform threshold key generation and threshold decryption but does
not describe how to implement them.
The Montgomery curve described in [RFC7748] allows for efficient
scalar multiplication using arithmetic operations on a single
coordinate. Point addition requires both coordinate values. It is
thus necessary to provide an extended representation for point
encoding and provide an algorithm for recovering both coordinates
from a scalar multiplication operation and an algorithm for point
addition.
The notation of [RFC7748] is followed using {u, v} to represent the
coordinates on the Montgomery curve and {x, y} for coordinates on the
corresponding Edwards curve.
5.2.1. Point Encoding
The relationship between the u and v coordinates is specified by the
Montgomery Curve formula itself:
_v^(2)_ = _u^(3) + Au2 + u_
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
An algorithm for extracting a square root of a number in a finite
field is specified in . [RFC8032]
Since _v^(2)_ has a positive (_v_) and a negative solution (_-v_), it
follows that _v^(2)_ mod p will have the solutions _v_, _p-v_.
Furthermore, since _p_ is odd, if _v_ is odd, _p-v_ must be even and
vice versa. It is thus sufficient to record whether _v_ is odd or
even to enable recovery of the _v_ coordinate from _u_.
5.2.2. X25519 Point Encoding
The extended point encoding allowing the v coordinate to be recovered
is as given in [draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations]
A curve point (u, v), with coordinates in the range 0 = u,v p, is
coded as follows. First, encode the u-coordinate as a little-endian
string of 57 octets. The final octet is always zero. To form the
encoding of the point, copy the least significant bit of the
v-coordinate to the most significant bit of the final octet.
5.2.3. X448 Point Encoding
The extended point encoding allowing the v coordinate to be recovered
is as given in [draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations]
A curve point (u, v), with coordinates in the range 0 = u,v p, is
coded as follows. First, encode the u-coordinate as a little-endian
string of 57 octets. The final octet is always zero. To form the
encoding of the point, copy the least significant bit of the
v-coordinate to the most significant bit of the final octet.
5.2.4. Point Addition
The point addition formula for the Montgomery curve is defined as
follows:
Let P_(1) = {u_(1), v_(1)}, P_(2) = {u_(2), v_(2)}, P_(3) = {u_(3),
v_(3)} = P_(1) + P_(2)
By definition:
u_(3) = B(v_(2) - v_(1))^(2) / (u_(2) - u_(1))^(2) - A - u_(1) -
u_(2)
= B((u_(2)v_(1) - u_(1)v_(2))^(2) ) / u_(1)u_(2) (u_(2) -
u_(1))^(2)
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
v_(3) = ((2u_(1) + u_(2) + A)(v_(2) - v_(1)) / (u_(2) - u_(1))) - B
(v_(2) - v_(1))^(3) / (u_(2) -u_(1))^(3) - v_(1)
For curves X25519 and X448, B = 1 and so:
u_(3) = ((v_(2) - v_(1)).(u_(2) - u_(1))^(-1))^(2) - A - u_(1) -
u_(2)
v_(3) = ((2u_(1) + u_(2) + A)(v_(2) - v_(1)).(u_(2) - u_(1))^(-1)) -
((v_(2) - v_(1)).(u_(2) -u_(1))^(-1))^(3) - v_(1)
This may be implemented using the following code:
B = v2 - v1
C = u2 - u1
CINV = C^(p - 2)
D = B * CINV
DD = D * D
DDD = DD * D
u3 = DD - A - u1 - u2
v3 = ((u1 + u1 + u2 + A) * B * CINV) - DDD - v1
Performing point addition thus requires that we have sufficient
knowledge of the values v_(1), v_(2). At minimum whether one is odd
and the other even or if both are the same.
5.2.5. Montgomery Ladder with Coordinate Recovery
As originally described, the Montgomery Ladder only provides the u
coordinate as output. L?pez and Dahab [Lopez99] provided a formula
for recovery of the v coordinate of the result for curves over binary
fields. This result was then extended by Okeya and Sakurai [Okeya01]
to prime field Montgomery curves such as X25519 and X448. The
realization of this result described by Costello and Smith
[Costello17] is applied here.
The scalar multiplication function specified in [RFC7748] takes as
input the scalar value k and the coordinate u_(1) of the point P_(1)
= {u_(1), v_(1)} to be multiplied. The return value in this case is
u_(2) where P_(2) = {u_(2), v_(2)} = k.P_(1).
To recover the coordinate v_(2) we require the values x_2, z_2, x_3,
z_3 calculated in the penultimate step:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
x_1 = u
x_2 = 1
z_2 = 0
x_3 = u
z_3 = 1
swap = 0
For t = bits-1 down to 0:
k_t = (k >> t) & 1
swap ^= k_t
// Conditional swap as specified in RFC 7748
(x_2, x_3) = cswap(swap, x_2, x_3)
(z_2, z_3) = cswap(swap, z_2, z_3)
swap = k_t
A = x_2 + z_2
AA = A^2
B = x_2 - z_2
BB = B^2
E = AA - BB
C = x_3 + z_3
D = x_3 - z_3
DA = D * A
CB = C * B
x_3 = (DA + CB)^2
z_3 = x_1 * (DA - CB)^2
x_2 = AA * BB
z_2 = E * (AA + a24 * E)
(x_2, x_3) = cswap(swap, x_2, x_3)
(z_2, z_3) = cswap(swap, z_2, z_3)
Return x_2, z_2, x_3, z_3
The values x_2, z_2 give the projective form of the u coordinate of
the point P_(2) = {u_(2), v_(2)} = k.P_(1) and the values x_3, z_3
give the projective form of the u coordinate of the point P_(3) =
{u_(3), v_(3)} = (k+1).P_(1) = P_(1) + k.P_(1) = P_(1) + P_(2).
Given the coordinates {u_(1), v_(1)} of the point P1 and the u
coordinates of the points P_(2), P_(1) + P_(2), the coordinate v_(2)
MAY be recovered by trial and error as follows:
v_test = SQRT (u3 + Au2 + u)
u_test = ADD_X (u, v, u_2, v_test)
if (u_test == u_3)
return u_test
else
return u_test +p
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Alternatively, the following MAY be used to recover {u_(2), v_(2)}
without the need to extract the square root and using a single
modular exponentiation operation to convert from the projective
coordinates used in the calculation. As with the Montgomery ladder
algorithm above, the expression has been modified to be consistent
with the approach used in [RFC7748] but any correct formula may be
used.
x_p = u
y_p = v
B = x_p * z_2 //v1
C = x_2 + B //v2
D = X_2 - B //v3
DD = D^2 //v3
E = DD. X_3 //v3
F = 2 * A * z_2 //v1
G = C + F //v2
H = x_p * x_2 //v4
I = H + z_2 //v4
J = G * I //v2
K = F * z_2 //v1
L = J - K //v2
M = L * z_3 //v2
yy_2 = M - E //Y'
N = 2 * y_p //v1
O = N * z_2 //v1
P = O * z_3 //v1
xx_2 = P * x_q //X'
zz_2 = P * z_ q //Z'
ZINV = (zz_2^(p - 2))
u2 = xx_2 * ZINV
v2 = yy_2 * ZINV
return u2, v2
6. Test Vectors
6.1. Threshold Key Generation
6.1.1. X25519
The key parameters of the first key contribution are:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
X25519Key1 (X25519)
UDF: ZAAA-CTKG-X255-XXKE-YX
Scalar: 324858804843944019775357777134446830499336694251
10150162410603197194664525072
Encoded Private
10 BD E5 52 D6 AF 62 BE E4 5B F3 30 B8 FC 1C 51
B3 1B 10 9D 1E E9 D7 8D 04 23 39 08 55 5B D2 47
U: 394710109806205653786046834135930103397328759791
49327589691528787260753559967
V: 356194396126197144337653540363972416928636805167
03007342935403505222303874766
Encoded Public
9F C1 03 BF A0 E6 6F C7 F1 98 4F 11 99 6E 35 E8
E0 12 0A 0A D0 0D 79 97 4E 8A 1C 08 EF CC 43 57
00
The key parameters of the second key contribution are:
X25519Key2 (X25519)
UDF: ZAAA-CTKG-X255-XXKE-Y2
Scalar: 411580799970764177643732652839689210097433579803
82961631181135147895746569008
Encoded Private
30 A3 31 35 93 F6 AD C9 AC 13 1C 27 15 83 C8 1B
00 EF 48 B9 52 14 8D 4D 3C F0 A3 C1 D2 A5 FE 5A
U: 459625327459773177107083316486045330014029630693
84886488666639114650950362503
V: 257984254735960195350757294576288849253536777584
92280923754924184339462178503
Encoded Public
87 E5 CC DD 1D AA 42 EA 6F E8 6F 70 71 EE CF 86
45 52 48 50 9D B2 6A 76 3B 7A 21 A0 23 DF 9D 65
80
The composite private key is:
Scalar_A = (Scalar_1 + Scalar_2) mod L
=127390470814819760217717736698366165110586381169403573357222896
2235868584190
Encoded Composite Private Key:
FE 18 7D E6 61 C7 58 17 32 4F 63 FA 1A BD 2F 9C
B2 0A 59 56 71 FD 64 DB 40 13 DD C9 27 01 D1 02
The composite public key is:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Point_A = Point_1 + Point_2
U: 150135516006055775898023592854502286813423441552
78788763949643404481150980325
V: 415138854802975146804397164494309448482487190852
96478905918078322266869330796
Encoded Public
E5 10 7A CA 6D 63 5F 0B 96 8D C1 FF 03 88 6A 9F
5E 39 FB C7 7D 4E 0C 8F B9 BE 02 68 7B 5E 31 21
Note that in this case, the unsigned representation of the key is
used as the composite key is intended for unsigned CurveX key
agreement. If the result is intended for use as a key contribution,
the signed representation is required.
6.1.2. X448
The key parameters of the first key contribution are:
X448Key1 (X448)
UDF: ZAAA-ETKG-X44X-KEYX
Scalar: 481994585826426647968618231378947367458943870175
360121942970840151506728554061197387112897908361553737348667
886278259299907241847731316
Encoded Private
74 B4 D2 F1 12 CC E7 DD F8 1A 30 80 1F 2C 19 EA
EF E2 B3 8A 84 AF 60 11 0C 12 ED C3 B7 59 AE CC
C9 B4 E4 9D 39 26 7C 61 5F 18 F1 24 FE 63 D6 4B
BB 90 58 16 43 6E C3 A9
U: 394700438080601820949554957897111201031639217153
649316073420498416350673492846326387358441405527682364389676
084099279128049619119543974
V: 444540392869323915210590844990511294596507999517
821659576820658489772434608466545900017841967298236181114781
72629203404123869477697007
Encoded Public
A6 96 1A 77 DC 39 41 5F D7 DA A5 07 45 AC 8E A4
3E AE 8C 77 BD 50 4A B0 24 64 CD EA 58 0A A3 C7
A7 80 BA A6 10 BD 57 9A FA 0C E3 EB 2F C8 BB 52
36 42 B2 58 C3 7B 04 8B 80
The key parameters of the second key contribution are:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
X448Key2 (X448)
UDF: ZAAA-ETKG-X44X-KEY2
Scalar: 511754555230466033071173155845990436633003100190
696628114856620555834938157360893794661792647517417178355617
271188892590944570884738624
Encoded Private
40 CE 77 E2 F2 EC 9B 7D 3E F4 62 C6 F9 99 81 B4
19 E5 4B 18 48 54 13 C9 79 D4 FF 3C ED 3B 9C A1
FE 10 7E DC 1F 56 BD 4D 27 7F 9C 70 4B 30 BE 0A
86 2A 01 3D 2A C3 3E B4
U: 150272226357947871808446816866811163361018047865
977226556625643162666620657310046951510401422900774703631401
927908349274354369426223715
V: 366137359317179726859107301681665650104046728426
432019544955478508004916807825041417161908471339553361130707
683387754680120674193097983
Encoded Public
63 F2 0D 66 B0 F9 43 1C 58 AD 56 2B C7 9A D5 83
B0 B5 B1 73 9A BE B9 1E 72 5D 4A F7 8D 45 00 A6
B3 7F AA 27 BE B4 72 44 EE D6 AA 24 5B BE B9 92
F8 8D 63 CC A1 6A ED 34 80
The composite private key is:
Scalar_A = (Scalar_1 + Scalar_2) mod L
=852007356873840678531366273649321361498952695069091747059647117
316116469037241626007959140974170910991528166120088403669830
33434221045
Encoded Composite Private Key:
F5 29 91 7B 28 EC 27 AA 8D 42 B7 81 DC F9 7A F7
38 B7 D0 38 5C BB E9 04 F5 32 FA 90 A7 95 4A 6E
C8 C5 62 7A 59 7C 39 AF 86 97 8D 95 49 94 94 56
41 BB 59 53 6D 31 02 1E
The composite public key is:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Point_A = Point_1 + Point_2
U: 992302561314692402358105531637482692313485564268
012269312838533303200135230457785976232221579845336021490878
11249911833804897105796187
V: 456075089062293144799088747749397731190530292504
203343525695648243447672023318462080397566120195617049762303
280841894269351301464260878
Encoded Public
5B DC 74 39 94 08 79 2C D5 F0 F1 E0 5F 7F 87 4D
4D 3B 92 96 AB 62 FF EC CB 3C 74 42 48 D2 D0 30
95 45 37 89 5E 53 5D 47 72 DD D8 1A 24 2C 65 76
1F 7A FB 2E 15 2D F3 22
Note that in this case, the unsigned representation of the key is
used as the composite key is intended for unsigned CurveX key
agreement. If the result is intended for use as a key contribution,
the signed representation is required.
6.1.3. Ed25519
The key parameters of the first key contribution are:
ED25519Key1 (ED25519)
UDF: ZAAA-GTKG-ED25-5XXK-EYX
Scalar: 566707288876750955042011684517553468890396806254
32020135051411766560411209648
Encoded Private
1D 04 C0 18 98 F0 31 CA 3B A1 F0 C3 AD 2B FC 3B
CF F1 DC DC 07 FC 61 5F B1 63 75 35 CE C4 EA B4
X: 102242812372232316143929541945425934190366349837
479493246432658075153118475011602747352787206173426322413798
12049009970952489882776094157952001361119144
Y: 789031640540855004178762236065881312872127689877
983340977132004355159711145586361923666616187290905159854593
272855769333002825303166428484255810207910288
Encoded Public
D8 4E 98 3E F7 21 87 CC C6 47 CB 6E 5A 57 1F 79
F5 B9 22 D9 A8 00 D3 69 91 E1 B6 E6 10 FF 59 08
The key parameters of the second key contribution are:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
ED25519Key2 (ED25519)
UDF: ZAAA-GTKG-ED25-5XXK-EY2
Scalar: 566707288876750955042011684517553468890396806254
32020135051411766560411209648
Encoded Private
1D 04 C0 18 98 F0 31 CA 3B A1 F0 C3 AD 2B FC 3B
CF F1 DC DC 07 FC 61 5F B1 63 75 35 CE C4 EA B4
X: 102242812372232316143929541945425934190366349837
479493246432658075153118475011602747352787206173426322413798
12049009970952489882776094157952001361119144
Y: 789031640540855004178762236065881312872127689877
983340977132004355159711145586361923666616187290905159854593
272855769333002825303166428484255810207910288
Encoded Public
D8 4E 98 3E F7 21 87 CC C6 47 CB 6E 5A 57 1F 79
F5 B9 22 D9 A8 00 D3 69 91 E1 B6 E6 10 FF 59 08
The composite private key is:
Scalar_A = (Scalar_1 + Scalar_2) mod L
=478637411536625779880453845786578016522261586016542618007355945
8839008654461
Encoded Composite Private Key:
7D 34 94 4B 39 80 D9 34 DB EB E1 7C 6C 7E BB FA
77 03 B0 DC 59 BD DB 30 E9 EC 02 15 E3 FD 94 0A
The composite public key is:
Point_A = Point_1 + Point_2
X: 156803891315589086286215914260988096641777056734
949191292807298262090581551508321205906817723758419038014448
221785557483058278412455441230622087321788265
Y: 797171707400790781155409731019930644260359827339
627382830182820599849038258772654275070450097319504001761725
123426865448110684459259776487353068850001481
Encoded Public
7B 1C 48 02 66 17 79 32 B3 02 7B 21 8E D8 FD 6C
A1 D5 EC 8E 28 5D E8 D3 E2 08 1A F9 EB FA AC 32
6.1.4. Ed448
The key parameters of the first key contribution are:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
ED448Key1 (ED448)
UDF: ZAAA-ITKG-ED44-XKEY-X
Scalar: 627183439506120484725959826569914487299049496696
595523009635802846606657882532934711603764178690431435900965
134411043888412886366713268
Encoded Private
03 81 D6 5A 17 53 20 CB F4 02 40 66 C8 28 A5 E7
85 C6 87 7D 41 3A 33 CD 5B 09 9F E5 DF 1A 80 4D
4F 6E B1 35 F7 46 8B 1C 46 99 6E 6D A4 B5 23 EC
FD 9C DF A4 9A E5 17 C6
X: 583262368398068306064924227289526726945089383036
870654148794281596473976374037255611400384372179423639836667
405050261630569976923704901
Y: 394808842674474575092248856523729981587605779158
130628847253048358283876706462306075444313878262092034880682
915931230840640589150609812
Encoded Public
BB 4B F3 61 B5 1F 95 1E 88 04 A8 5E 48 77 4C A5
25 F0 D6 49 41 07 12 C1 15 05 25 78 60 FC D9 A8
CC DB F9 6D 63 6B C3 F7 63 F2 BB 00 A0 7C 13 E1
C6 4B 72 08 EA C8 87 11 00
The key parameters of the second key contribution are:
ED448Key2 (ED448)
UDF: ZAAA-ITKG-ED44-XKEY-2
Scalar: 627183439506120484725959826569914487299049496696
595523009635802846606657882532934711603764178690431435900965
134411043888412886366713268
Encoded Private
03 81 D6 5A 17 53 20 CB F4 02 40 66 C8 28 A5 E7
85 C6 87 7D 41 3A 33 CD 5B 09 9F E5 DF 1A 80 4D
4F 6E B1 35 F7 46 8B 1C 46 99 6E 6D A4 B5 23 EC
FD 9C DF A4 9A E5 17 C6
X: 583262368398068306064924227289526726945089383036
870654148794281596473976374037255611400384372179423639836667
405050261630569976923704901
Y: 394808842674474575092248856523729981587605779158
130628847253048358283876706462306075444313878262092034880682
915931230840640589150609812
Encoded Public
BB 4B F3 61 B5 1F 95 1E 88 04 A8 5E 48 77 4C A5
25 F0 D6 49 41 07 12 C1 15 05 25 78 60 FC D9 A8
CC DB F9 6D 63 6B C3 F7 63 F2 BB 00 A0 7C 13 E1
C6 4B 72 08 EA C8 87 11 00
The composite private key is:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Scalar_A = (Scalar_1 + Scalar_2) mod L
=164108792568830633627933941307822173067636952362213955597036306
922337291995828355126032996607226607091940168014272113948183
237575527862
Encoded Composite Private Key:
B6 4D CF FC C2 D8 08 4F 08 3C 03 5E C5 68 95 D2
65 F8 1D F2 C6 DC 4D 2E 23 B5 D5 02 AC 7A C5 A8
77 E9 D0 6E A2 1D 3D 11 91 49 AC 00 BF 0A 5B 95
59 BD 0D 94 6E 00 CD 39
The composite public key is:
Point_A = Point_1 + Point_2
X: 397684546797270425386442556916724605113037846866
341266059847555740358632067326446186925590144430667066483990
646036946928867316187394724
Y: 408779958726533701154676738846429933260841277918
126357328937237395286337382114316760480663335443832148985549
99820255282659972439867001
Encoded Public
39 DE 52 BB 22 79 72 DD 40 82 BB 45 7B FA 61 AD
D0 BA 02 FF 8A FB 62 62 39 C6 C0 46 6B 35 93 E4
CD 1B 5F 79 FB D7 68 87 4C E7 D8 09 B1 3C ED 5A
DE 61 5A D2 DC 19 C6 D3 00
6.2. Threshold Decryption
6.2.1. Direct Key Splitting X25519
The encryption key pair is
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
X25519KeyA (X25519)
UDF: ZAAA-CTHD-X255-XXKE-YA
Scalar: 326889380688366386055157824948497405399138729191
89762489343300449845480879296
Encoded Private
C0 74 51 B1 0A 11 F3 AA E9 E8 5C 99 A2 29 2F 78
88 A8 FC 3D 09 69 06 60 C2 B4 95 71 85 48 45 48
U: 298393977624490693814310584567182927861271505374
9632477801696949179285366587
V: 469514996865823666093464626932614325688577702009
92824380735949162568370305003
Encoded Public
3B E7 D1 11 EA 09 02 81 C7 88 E9 59 7A 44 D1 D5
34 AE 12 E2 3C 59 32 99 41 D1 99 B6 9D D9 98 06
To create n key shares we first create n-1 key pairs in the normal
fashion. Since these key pairs are only used for decryption
operations, it is not necessary to calculate the public components:
X25519Key1 (X25519)
UDF: ZAAA-CTHD-X255-XXKE-YX
Scalar: 312348810422743662022326371802074910867528782383
29365764492453739245942799272
Encoded Private
A8 FB C2 FD 62 20 CA 30 DA 44 87 38 BA 30 BE 5E
FD 71 8F 48 33 E2 D2 9E 3F 28 AA C7 F0 50 0E 45
The secret scalar of the final key share is the secret scalar of the
base key minus the sum of the secret scalars of the other shares
modulo the group order:
Scalar_2 = (Scalar_A - Scalar_1) mod L
=602777449245290709596292717071327769980982028247986740582014668
2807789670656
This is encoded as a binary integer in little endian format:
00 D1 65 C7 9A 18 2A 1B 11 47 27 BA 67 8B F5 2F
85 1A 8C 86 3C 4B D9 FE 01 DD 3F 39 76 99 53 0D
6.2.2. Direct Decryption X25519
The means of encryption is unchanged. We begin by generating an
ephemeral key pair:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
X25519KeyE (X25519)
UDF: ZAAA-CTHD-X255-XXKE-YE
Scalar: 493149316568141341116267515722816577238360781396
63006284230452497981236822048
Encoded Private
20 C0 8B F4 BA DB D2 9A 69 47 45 73 4F 34 8E 35
B5 78 24 AB F6 85 29 51 37 0A CB 38 1E 43 07 6D
U: 262957444446660172926134873812719769018477396438
13954077731613449391499377029
V: 275785345363973047453636076008194379259667671218
204709190728344437212344040
Encoded Public
85 F9 AB 1E 1F 07 0F F9 9A 61 9F 3A C8 34 C5 A2
44 20 2A 92 7C 06 D8 54 E7 56 83 4F 2A DD 22 3A
The key agreement result is given by multiplying the public key of
the encryption pair by the secret scalar of the ephemeral key to
obtain the u-coordinate of the result.
U: 288787781548525369610061893837025332891029237654
14471063569609087123262768472
The u-coordinate is encoded in the usual fashion (i.e. without
specifying the sign of v).
58 85 FB 70 25 DB ED FB F4 3F C2 11 65 A7 B6 FA
1B 2F 02 B7 36 34 A3 7B F3 A0 2B 90 27 CF D8 3F
The first decryption contribution is generated from the secret scalar
of the first key share and the public key of the ephemeral.
The outputs from the Montgomery Ladder are:
x_2: 492098238905847779621612291688488017809049229602
94749204467459229896958710447
z_2: 429527757883227955375237456769123024739869368263
91347354499451449213467668091
x_3: 116605272267998449524192895707557114882629363798
86482562941790223923418840285
z_3: 195732355890349962819915384747512066302779899283
35607999800289560050872569334
The coordinates of the corresponding point are:
u: 536730894304808282930528988436660517867298128709
04753433533361766729625453382
v: 421632078600697821949748757382882309748636068616
05021486709890742236074210497
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
The encoding of this point specifies the u coordinate and the sign
(oddness) of the v coordinate:
85 F9 AB 1E 1F 07 0F F9 9A 61 9F 3A C8 34 C5 A2
44 20 2A 92 7C 06 D8 54 E7 56 83 4F 2A DD 22 3A
The second decryption contribution is generated from the secret
scalar of the second key share and the public key of the ephemeral in
the same way:
u: 315780533103181510115520285714808517940341134033
73677773373235419322267220550
v: 182446295500312360012159151093139263903764865208
52094490828880182704089261185
85 F9 AB 1E 1F 07 0F F9 9A 61 9F 3A C8 34 C5 A2
44 20 2A 92 7C 06 D8 54 E7 56 83 4F 2A DD 22 3A
To obtain the key agreement value, we add the two decryption
contributions:
u: 400218389629441160369977262251603578789352483113
44007312711045713754930418024
v: 365543819982499491694061844647668737870082451479
1236363503671566229693675370
This returns the same u coordinate value as before, allowing us to
obtain the encoding of the key agreement value and decrypt the
message.
6.2.3. Direct Key Splitting X448
The encryption key pair is
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
X448KeyA (X448)
UDF: ZAAA-ETHD-X44X-KEYA
Scalar: 513061070451628243040038974375191143450906600896
180328078543208371170428980692680538107843349213517810077524
748539797940481719097207576
Encoded Private
18 AB BD 69 F6 B7 16 23 72 4E B5 28 7E F8 F1 4E
DB B5 6C EF 00 CD 51 4A AD F6 24 AF 73 0B CC 37
E4 66 01 C0 B4 35 18 99 CA 31 D0 7E 5D C6 86 9F
4F 33 33 95 BB 90 B4 B4
U: 193313388884413202154350037477490868937254022660
936368668113777978992235566230625856064905970782804480638718
961661755983597338734305565
V: 632512063264494610095455928921278058920338770152
331221019494393225431601640040112765612198296012844171344559
006776860014410518640582570
Encoded Public
1D 21 53 89 F7 D8 78 AD F5 4F 66 AE F6 E4 35 57
A4 2D 0F 29 D7 ED 64 13 5A 15 5D 0C 5A 9D 78 8E
30 AA D7 ED 94 D3 0A FD 5F C9 EB C4 6E 78 CB EC
67 10 DE 1A F7 41 16 44
To create n key shares we first create n-1 key pairs in the normal
fashion. Since these key pairs are only used for decryption
operations, it is not necessary to calculate the public components:
X448Key1 (X448)
UDF: ZAAA-ETHD-X44X-KEYX
Scalar: 584733191291060171614515657474831905352900996815
538008733617256668598608739673264046230908386003505289747870
068686374821834248930905564
Encoded Private
DC CD 9E 38 94 A1 EA CA 7D 41 FA B5 FB D3 01 43
4A FB F9 1D AE 73 82 3B 4C 11 A8 F2 2A 36 87 AB
3F EB EE E8 DC AB A7 30 5E 26 9C BC 4C FC D0 C8
48 F1 D3 78 A1 F0 F2 CD
The secret scalar of the final key share is the secret scalar of the
base key minus the sum of the secret scalars of the other shares
modulo the group order:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Scalar_2 = (Scalar_A - Scalar_1) mod L
=753617529927807883056892001801624727334555668074124638992516626
889301395112843028716421998506276731996363256267619893367343
2870214466
This is encoded as a binary integer in little endian format:
42 DB 4A 9E 1A CA 2C 19 F1 33 0E 8C CA 3D 67 C9
C4 69 61 F4 F4 1C FB EB 7E 30 10 B5 A1 41 53 E3
23 52 F0 A8 91 E1 BF C9 28 58 6C 3B AA C2 57 68
98 24 07 0E 5D 81 A7 02
6.2.4. Direct Decryption X448
The means of encryption is unchanged. We begin by generating an
ephemeral key pair:
X448KeyE (X448)
UDF: ZAAA-ETHD-X44X-KEYE
Scalar: 375092101281685084138772040470324089521485504818
151786170217259465369930000693812877111168523934570244151290
043203531788355356164832452
Encoded Private
C4 3C 47 59 CD E7 17 95 B4 7B 93 AA 69 B8 B6 B7
ED FE 18 D7 F4 7F 60 65 F1 89 C7 35 8D B5 43 37
1B 7F 29 3E C2 DE EF 30 B6 C6 B5 53 17 C5 53 34
E1 86 A9 88 60 7B 1C 84
U: 563581233819606639218664767140161390782939076635
909204332105344559772692562144684584035704830171693935746990
510749935485351255733775569
V: 361864251157310605646771236064439317468860292821
265311098908535377847605233578670208219924720551821972711559
36724947885353521079579125
Encoded Public
D1 2C A9 6B 5E 97 F8 F0 18 2A BF 33 E8 14 65 23
A9 F1 06 9B D5 F0 DB 06 01 E5 1F 87 07 7D 69 63
0A FD 05 FB 7A 65 4C D5 81 FC 63 11 5B D6 40 A1
40 2F A5 FE B3 C1 7F C6
The key agreement result is given by multiplying the public key of
the encryption pair by the secret scalar of the ephemeral key to
obtain the u-coordinate of the result.
U: 467011616546325364170545331693527825162957894564
752019329166269756954567903847269575078419988391203956276277
502444715801151733990260662
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
The u-coordinate is encoded in the usual fashion (i.e. without
specifying the sign of v).
B6 7F 79 43 2A 13 43 58 EB A5 F5 7E 0E 58 9B AA
BB D7 B1 7E 07 3E 42 F1 ED F4 C0 09 0C 5C 4E 88
C9 81 21 E5 31 53 40 2F DE 7B 91 FE E4 47 A2 A7
9B F8 E8 B0 AC 7A 7C A4 00
The first decryption contribution is generated from the secret scalar
of the first key share and the public key of the ephemeral.
The outputs from the Montgomery Ladder are:
x_2: 506558348563097978312390313048113345168022212711
849349435150224631183990403335052324912391443123499702764248
849278356671151441957790278
z_2: 213125180906412917064601709491242258781796680209
496987386274744929820708257576147081840825053136082223498470
326539519004870996749115274
x_3: 203497752532008592529275846876889307392855130050
266584525256476121907823114215626360048014875021016264668899
873822741730779444877210235
z_3: 571082612271586102575474047974979930626798015601
680732025993048573542014881343408880669710315066232049715159
504508304710290054762104158
The coordinates of the corresponding point are:
u: 612112921160648939091711280397522831608649375644
855484627685573574796097573324948060246221854728690332168796
528561330174015687677222868
v: 201043408411452768324992701951900381185869686931
750056109757993947816262634088142979592355613308839469219652
899581533430916970635983432
The encoding of this point specifies the u coordinate and the sign
(oddness) of the v coordinate:
D1 2C A9 6B 5E 97 F8 F0 18 2A BF 33 E8 14 65 23
A9 F1 06 9B D5 F0 DB 06 01 E5 1F 87 07 7D 69 63
0A FD 05 FB 7A 65 4C D5 81 FC 63 11 5B D6 40 A1
40 2F A5 FE B3 C1 7F C6
The second decryption contribution is generated from the secret
scalar of the second key share and the public key of the ephemeral in
the same way:
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
u: 290543592387303668402000444540573819834556168336
146133899156492196788195733788135568819938481333767701019721
625502303783518942583538850
v: 545084635544186338165791882421333945771369831404
654834318355031722653832417877619017774120725462178582001609
731098147709911715676858744
D1 2C A9 6B 5E 97 F8 F0 18 2A BF 33 E8 14 65 23
A9 F1 06 9B D5 F0 DB 06 01 E5 1F 87 07 7D 69 63
0A FD 05 FB 7A 65 4C D5 81 FC 63 11 5B D6 40 A1
40 2F A5 FE B3 C1 7F C6
To obtain the key agreement value, we add the two decryption
contributions:
u: 654406645663157043297342343331709836245150043735
702788665901049252553535973169012625989449576860527067131717
971914114816832035824532119
v: 104146947548847304025795777575846818531726293762
244429364569547834686063656820529540685030846449787127578128
365084621097748733067553687
This returns the same u coordinate value as before, allowing us to
obtain the encoding of the key agreement value and decrypt the
message.
6.2.5. Shamir Secret Sharing X448
[TBS]
6.2.6. Lagrange Decryption X448
[TBS]
7. Security Considerations
All the security considerations of [RFC7748] and [RFC8032] apply and
are hereby incorporated by reference.
7.1. Complacency Risk
Separation of duties can lead to a reduction in overall security
through complacency and lack of oversight.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
Consider the case in which a role that was performed by A alone is
split into two roles B and C. If B and C each do their job with the
same diligence as A did alone, risk should be reduced but if B and C
each decide they can be careless because security is the
responsibility of the other, the risk of a breach may be
substantially increased.
It is therefore important that each of the participants in a
threshold scheme perform their responsibilities with the same degree
of diligence as if they were the sole control and for those
responsible for oversight to treat single point failures that do not
lead to an actual breach with the same degree of concern as if a
breach had occurred.
Use of threshold operation modes mitigates but does not eliminate
security considerations relating to private key operations of the
underlying algorithm. For example, use of threshold key generation
to generate a composite keypair {b+c, B+C} from key contributions {b,
B} and {c, C} produces a strong composite private key if either of
the key contributions _a_, _b_ are strong. But the composite key
will be weak if neither contribution is strong.
7.2. Rogue Key Attack
In general, threshold modes of operation provide a work factor that
is at least as high as that of the work factor of the strongest
private key share. The karmic tradeoff for this benefit is that the
trustworthiness of a composite public key is that of the least
trustworthy input.
For example, consider the case in which a client with keypair {c, C}
generates an ephemeral keypair {e, E} for use in an authentication
algorithm. We might decide to create an 'efficient' proof of
knowledge of c and e by using the composite public key A = C+E to
test for knowledge of both at the same time.
This approach fails because an attacker with knowledge of C can
generate a keypair {a, A} and calculate the corresponding public key
E = A-C. The attacker can then use the value a in the authentication
protocol.
8. IANA Considerations
This document requires no IANA actions (yet).
It will be necessary to define additional code points for the signed
version of the X25519 and X448 public key and the threshold
decryption final private keys.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
9. Acknowledgements
Rene Struik, Tony Arcieri, Scott Fluhrer, Scott Fluhrer, Dan Brown,
Mike Hamburg
10. Appendix A: Calculating Lagrange coefficients
The following C# code calculates the Lagrange coefficients used to
recover the secret from a set of shares.
[TBS]
11. Normative References
[draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations]
Struik, R., "Alternative Elliptic Curve Representations",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lwig-curve-
representations-12, 24 August 2020,
.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
.
[RFC7748] Langley, A., Hamburg, M., and S. Turner, "Elliptic Curves
for Security", RFC 7748, DOI 10.17487/RFC7748, January
2016, .
[RFC8032] Josefsson, S. and I. Liusvaara, "Edwards-Curve Digital
Signature Algorithm (EdDSA)", RFC 8032,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8032, January 2017,
.
12. Informative References
[Costello17]
Costello, C. and B. Smith, "Montgomery curves and their
arithmetic", 2017.
[draft-hallambaker-mesh-architecture]
Hallam-Baker, P., "Mathematical Mesh 3.0 Part I:
Architecture Guide", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
draft-hallambaker-mesh-architecture-14, 27 July 2020,
.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft Threshold Modes in Elliptic Curves November 2020
[draft-hallambaker-mesh-developer]
Hallam-Baker, P., "Mathematical Mesh: Reference
Implementation", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
hallambaker-mesh-developer-10, 27 July 2020,
.
[draft-hallambaker-threshold-sigs]
Hallam-Baker, P., "Threshold Signatures in Elliptic
Curves", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
hallambaker-threshold-sigs-04, 3 September 2020,
.
[Kocher96] Kocher, P. C., "Timing attacks on implementations of
Diffie-Hellman, RSA, DSS, and other systems.", 1996.
[Lopez99] L?opez, J. and R. Dahab, "Fast multiplication on elliptic
curves over GF(2m) without precomputation.", 1999.
[Okeya01] Okeya, K. and K. Sakurai, "Efficient elliptic curve
cryptosystems from a scalar multiplication algorithm with
recovery of the y-coordinate on a Montgomeryform elliptic
curve.", 2001.
[RFC2631] Rescorla, E., "Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method",
RFC 2631, DOI 10.17487/RFC2631, June 1999,
.
[Shamir79] Shamir, A., "How to share a secret.", 1979.
Hallam-Baker Expires 6 May 2021 [Page 39]