questions on fips provider

[pauli at openssl.org]

Hi,

I would suggest that you contact your FIPS lab for definitive answers to 
your questions.  This is well outside the experience of the OpenSSL team 
members' FIPS experience.

My understanding is that you are correct but the FIPS criteria are 
fickle until a lab has determined and resolved an outcome.


Dr Paul Dale


On 30/6/2023 5:58 pm, Zhongyan Wang wrote:
>
> 5) Is it possible to load multiple providers like default, leacy and 
> also fips programmatically using  OSSL_PROVIDER_load function ?
>
> =>This is my own thought, not official. In my product, we also use 
> FIPS module and we have one FIPS mode, one non-FIPS mode. They are 
> mutually exclusive.
>
> In FIPS mode, we load FIPS and base providers together. In non-FIPS 
> mode, we load default provider by default and optional load legacy 
> provider by customer setting.
>
> 6) When multiple providers like for ex: FIPS and default provider are 
> enabled and when an encryption function is called, then algorithm from 
> which provider is picked(from my findings it can use any of the loaded 
> provider implementations )? assumption that we have *not* used 
> property query string during algorithm fetches to specify which 
> implementation to be used.
>
> =>In the openssl 3.0 migration guide, it says this result is 
> undefined. So we design my product as above to make sure FIPS and 
> default provider won’t be loaded at same time.
>
> On the other hand, I also have a question about FIPS provider:
>
> How to specify the path of openssl.cnf and so-called fipsmodule.cnf 
> programmatically when load FIPS Provider?
>
> Our product has a build-in openssl bin and library, but doesn’t have 
> any openssl configure file due to history reason.
>
> I will add execute “make fipsinstall” during the product installation 
> to generate the fipsmodule.cnf.
>
> Since customer can install product to anywhere and “make fipsinstall” 
> can also install fipsmodule.cnf to anywhere and openssl library won’t 
> know the location.
>
> So I can’t successfully load FIPS provider because it doesn’t know 
> where is the fipsmodule.cnf. Per my test, it seems to find 
> fipsmodule.cnf in pre-fix path configure in compile.
>
> My key point is: is there a method to let openssl know where to 
> load/check fipsmodule.cnf?
>
> *From:* openssl-users <openssl-users-bounces at openssl.org> *On Behalf 
> Of *pauli at openssl.org
> *Sent:* Friday, June 30, 2023 15:16
> *To:* openssl-users at openssl.org
> *Subject:* Re: questions on fips provider
>
> *EXTERNAL EMAIL*
>
>
>
> Answers below....
>
>     1) Is there a way to static link FIPS? I see at many places that
>     fips cannot be statically linked but would like to know if we
>     have any other ways to do that.
>
>
> No.  This was a design goal/limitation from the start.  Statically 
> linking the FIPS provider would have been a major source of pain.  We 
> managed it for 1.0.2 with some inspirational assembly coding but that 
> approach wouldn't have worked for 3.0.
>
>
>     2) If it is dynamic linking then does FIPS has any integrity check
>     to make sure fips.so/fips.dll <http://fips.so/fips.dll> is the
>     right one? and not some thing tampered by some body(as per my
>     findings we have some check in configuration file as mentioned in
>     the below attached snapshot 3rd line)
>
>
> Yes it does do an integrity check on load.  This was the main reason 
> to limit the FIPS provider to being a loadable module.  The approach 
> taken in the 1.0.2 FOM wasn't viable with the re-architecture.
>
>
>     3) can both legacy and fips providers be loaded and used?
>
>
> Technically yes, but you'll not be FIPS compliant unless you are 
> *extremely* careful.
> Which means talking to your FIPS labs and getting official resolutions 
> on the specifics.
> The OpenSSL developers are ***not*** FIPS experts. Only a FIPS lab can 
> definitively answer questions like this.
>
>
>     4) Is it possible If i have built openssl with no-module configure
>     option (to statically link legacy provider) and also wanted to
>     use  openssl-3.0.8 built fips module here? If yes then in what way
>     can it be done?
>
>
> Honestly not sure here.  You *must* load the FIPS provider dynamically 
> to be compliant.
> If that's possible with the no-moduleoption, you should be okay.  I 
> suspect it isn't.  Try it and see.
>
> If you don't get a definitive result, this means talking to your FIPS 
> labs and getting official resolutions on the specifics.
> The OpenSSL developers are ***not*** FIPS experts. Only a FIPS lab can 
> definitively answer questions like this.
>
>
>     5) Is it possible to load multiple providers like default, leacy
>     and also fips programmatically using  OSSL_PROVIDER_load function ?
>
>
> Absolutely it is possible.  However, meeting FIPS requirements 
> afterwards could be problematic.
> This means talking to your FIPS labs and getting official resolutions 
> on the specifics.
> The OpenSSL developers are ***not*** FIPS experts.  Only a FIPS lab 
> can definitively answer questions like this.
>
> Having several library contexts with each having different providers 
> loaded might be a way to circumvent the strict interpretation of the 
> requirements.  This means talking to your FIPS labs and getting 
> official resolutions on the specifics.
> The OpenSSL developers are ***not*** FIPS experts.  Only a FIPS lab 
> can definitively answer questions like this.
>
>
>     6) When multiple providers like for ex:  FIPS and default provider
>     are enabled and when an encryption function is called, then
>     algorithm from which provider is picked(from my findings it can
>     use any of the loaded provider implementations )? assumption that
>     we have *not* used property query string during algorithm fetches
>     to specify which implementation to be used.
>
>
> The OpenSSL project *deliberately* makes *no guarantee* about which 
> provider is used in such cases.  It is deterministic currently, but 
> there is no guarantee that we'll not change the order of resolution or 
> making it randomly non-deterministic in any future releases.  
> Honestly, expect that *we will* make changes to the resolution order 
> in the future.  Such a change is not considered breaking and doesn't 
> have to adhere to our stable release policy.
>
> Our best recommendation is to not mix providers in library contexts.  
> Seek resolution from you FIPS lab.
>
>
> Dr Paul Dale
>
> ================================
> Rocket Software, Inc. and subsidiaries ■ 77 Fourth Avenue, Waltham MA 
> 02451 ■ Main Office Toll Free Number: +1 855.577.4323
> Contact Customer Support: 
> https://my.rocketsoftware.com/RocketCommunity/RCEmailSupport
> Unsubscribe from Marketing Messages/Manage Your Subscription 
> Preferences - http://www.rocketsoftware.com/manage-your-email-preferences
> Privacy Policy - 
> http://www.rocketsoftware.com/company/legal/privacy-policy
> ================================
>
> This communication and any attachments may contain confidential 
> information of Rocket Software, Inc. All unauthorized use, disclosure 
> or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, 
> please notify Rocket Software immediately and destroy all copies of 
> this communication. Thank you.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-users/attachments/20230630/981598d6/attachment-0001.htm>