diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'openssl/crypto/engine/README')
| -rw-r--r-- | openssl/crypto/engine/README | 211 |
1 files changed, 211 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/openssl/crypto/engine/README b/openssl/crypto/engine/README new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6b69b70f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/openssl/crypto/engine/README @@ -0,0 +1,211 @@ +Notes: 2001-09-24 +----------------- + +This "description" (if one chooses to call it that) needed some major updating +so here goes. This update addresses a change being made at the same time to +OpenSSL, and it pretty much completely restructures the underlying mechanics of +the "ENGINE" code. So it serves a double purpose of being a "ENGINE internals +for masochists" document *and* a rather extensive commit log message. (I'd get +lynched for sticking all this in CHANGES or the commit mails :-). + +ENGINE_TABLE underlies this restructuring, as described in the internal header +"eng_int.h", implemented in eng_table.c, and used in each of the "class" files; +tb_rsa.c, tb_dsa.c, etc. + +However, "EVP_CIPHER" underlies the motivation and design of ENGINE_TABLE so +I'll mention a bit about that first. EVP_CIPHER (and most of this applies +equally to EVP_MD for digests) is both a "method" and a algorithm/mode +identifier that, in the current API, "lingers". These cipher description + +implementation structures can be defined or obtained directly by applications, +or can be loaded "en masse" into EVP storage so that they can be catalogued and +searched in various ways, ie. two ways of encrypting with the "des_cbc" +algorithm/mode pair are; + +(i) directly; + const EVP_CIPHER *cipher = EVP_des_cbc(); + EVP_EncryptInit(&ctx, cipher, key, iv); + [ ... use EVP_EncryptUpdate() and EVP_EncryptFinal() ...] + +(ii) indirectly; + OpenSSL_add_all_ciphers(); + cipher = EVP_get_cipherbyname("des_cbc"); + EVP_EncryptInit(&ctx, cipher, key, iv); + [ ... etc ... ] + +The latter is more generally used because it also allows ciphers/digests to be +looked up based on other identifiers which can be useful for automatic cipher +selection, eg. in SSL/TLS, or by user-controllable configuration. + +The important point about this is that EVP_CIPHER definitions and structures are +passed around with impunity and there is no safe way, without requiring massive +rewrites of many applications, to assume that EVP_CIPHERs can be reference +counted. One an EVP_CIPHER is exposed to the caller, neither it nor anything it +comes from can "safely" be destroyed. Unless of course the way of getting to +such ciphers is via entirely distinct API calls that didn't exist before. +However existing API usage cannot be made to understand when an EVP_CIPHER +pointer, that has been passed to the caller, is no longer being used. + +The other problem with the existing API w.r.t. to hooking EVP_CIPHER support +into ENGINE is storage - the OBJ_NAME-based storage used by EVP to register +ciphers simultaneously registers cipher *types* and cipher *implementations* - +they are effectively the same thing, an "EVP_CIPHER" pointer. The problem with +hooking in ENGINEs is that multiple ENGINEs may implement the same ciphers. The +solution is necessarily that ENGINE-provided ciphers simply are not registered, +stored, or exposed to the caller in the same manner as existing ciphers. This is +especially necessary considering the fact ENGINE uses reference counts to allow +for cleanup, modularity, and DSO support - yet EVP_CIPHERs, as exposed to +callers in the current API, support no such controls. + +Another sticking point for integrating cipher support into ENGINE is linkage. +Already there is a problem with the way ENGINE supports RSA, DSA, etc whereby +they are available *because* they're part of a giant ENGINE called "openssl". +Ie. all implementations *have* to come from an ENGINE, but we get round that by +having a giant ENGINE with all the software support encapsulated. This creates +linker hassles if nothing else - linking a 1-line application that calls 2 basic +RSA functions (eg. "RSA_free(RSA_new());") will result in large quantities of +ENGINE code being linked in *and* because of that DSA, DH, and RAND also. If we +continue with this approach for EVP_CIPHER support (even if it *was* possible) +we would lose our ability to link selectively by selectively loading certain +implementations of certain functionality. Touching any part of any kind of +crypto would result in massive static linkage of everything else. So the +solution is to change the way ENGINE feeds existing "classes", ie. how the +hooking to ENGINE works from RSA, DSA, DH, RAND, as well as adding new hooking +for EVP_CIPHER, and EVP_MD. + +The way this is now being done is by mostly reverting back to how things used to +work prior to ENGINE :-). Ie. RSA now has a "RSA_METHOD" pointer again - this +was previously replaced by an "ENGINE" pointer and all RSA code that required +the RSA_METHOD would call ENGINE_get_RSA() each time on its ENGINE handle to +temporarily get and use the ENGINE's RSA implementation. Apart from being more +efficient, switching back to each RSA having an RSA_METHOD pointer also allows +us to conceivably operate with *no* ENGINE. As we'll see, this removes any need +for a fallback ENGINE that encapsulates default implementations - we can simply +have our RSA structure pointing its RSA_METHOD pointer to the software +implementation and have its ENGINE pointer set to NULL. + +A look at the EVP_CIPHER hooking is most explanatory, the RSA, DSA (etc) cases +turn out to be degenerate forms of the same thing. The EVP storage of ciphers, +and the existing EVP API functions that return "software" implementations and +descriptions remain untouched. However, the storage takes more meaning in terms +of "cipher description" and less meaning in terms of "implementation". When an +EVP_CIPHER_CTX is actually initialised with an EVP_CIPHER method and is about to +begin en/decryption, the hooking to ENGINE comes into play. What happens is that +cipher-specific ENGINE code is asked for an ENGINE pointer (a functional +reference) for any ENGINE that is registered to perform the algo/mode that the +provided EVP_CIPHER structure represents. Under normal circumstances, that +ENGINE code will return NULL because no ENGINEs will have had any cipher +implementations *registered*. As such, a NULL ENGINE pointer is stored in the +EVP_CIPHER_CTX context, and the EVP_CIPHER structure is left hooked into the +context and so is used as the implementation. Pretty much how things work now +except we'd have a redundant ENGINE pointer set to NULL and doing nothing. + +Conversely, if an ENGINE *has* been registered to perform the algorithm/mode +combination represented by the provided EVP_CIPHER, then a functional reference +to that ENGINE will be returned to the EVP_CIPHER_CTX during initialisation. +That functional reference will be stored in the context (and released on +cleanup) - and having that reference provides a *safe* way to use an EVP_CIPHER +definition that is private to the ENGINE. Ie. the EVP_CIPHER provided by the +application will actually be replaced by an EVP_CIPHER from the registered +ENGINE - it will support the same algorithm/mode as the original but will be a +completely different implementation. Because this EVP_CIPHER isn't stored in the +EVP storage, nor is it returned to applications from traditional API functions, +there is no associated problem with it not having reference counts. And of +course, when one of these "private" cipher implementations is hooked into +EVP_CIPHER_CTX, it is done whilst the EVP_CIPHER_CTX holds a functional +reference to the ENGINE that owns it, thus the use of the ENGINE's EVP_CIPHER is +safe. + +The "cipher-specific ENGINE code" I mentioned is implemented in tb_cipher.c but +in essence it is simply an instantiation of "ENGINE_TABLE" code for use by +EVP_CIPHER code. tb_digest.c is virtually identical but, of course, it is for +use by EVP_MD code. Ditto for tb_rsa.c, tb_dsa.c, etc. These instantiations of +ENGINE_TABLE essentially provide linker-separation of the classes so that even +if ENGINEs implement *all* possible algorithms, an application using only +EVP_CIPHER code will link at most code relating to EVP_CIPHER, tb_cipher.c, core +ENGINE code that is independant of class, and of course the ENGINE +implementation that the application loaded. It will *not* however link any +class-specific ENGINE code for digests, RSA, etc nor will it bleed over into +other APIs, such as the RSA/DSA/etc library code. + +ENGINE_TABLE is a little more complicated than may seem necessary but this is +mostly to avoid a lot of "init()"-thrashing on ENGINEs (that may have to load +DSOs, and other expensive setup that shouldn't be thrashed unnecessarily) *and* +to duplicate "default" behaviour. Basically an ENGINE_TABLE instantiation, for +example tb_cipher.c, implements a hash-table keyed by integer "nid" values. +These nids provide the uniquenness of an algorithm/mode - and each nid will hash +to a potentially NULL "ENGINE_PILE". An ENGINE_PILE is essentially a list of +pointers to ENGINEs that implement that particular 'nid'. Each "pile" uses some +caching tricks such that requests on that 'nid' will be cached and all future +requests will return immediately (well, at least with minimal operation) unless +a change is made to the pile, eg. perhaps an ENGINE was unloaded. The reason is +that an application could have support for 10 ENGINEs statically linked +in, and the machine in question may not have any of the hardware those 10 +ENGINEs support. If each of those ENGINEs has a "des_cbc" implementation, we +want to avoid every EVP_CIPHER_CTX setup from trying (and failing) to initialise +each of those 10 ENGINEs. Instead, the first such request will try to do that +and will either return (and cache) a NULL ENGINE pointer or will return a +functional reference to the first that successfully initialised. In the latter +case it will also cache an extra functional reference to the ENGINE as a +"default" for that 'nid'. The caching is acknowledged by a 'uptodate' variable +that is unset only if un/registration takes place on that pile. Ie. if +implementations of "des_cbc" are added or removed. This behaviour can be +tweaked; the ENGINE_TABLE_FLAG_NOINIT value can be passed to +ENGINE_set_table_flags(), in which case the only ENGINEs that tb_cipher.c will +try to initialise from the "pile" will be those that are already initialised +(ie. it's simply an increment of the functional reference count, and no real +"initialisation" will take place). + +RSA, DSA, DH, and RAND all have their own ENGINE_TABLE code as well, and the +difference is that they all use an implicit 'nid' of 1. Whereas EVP_CIPHERs are +actually qualitatively different depending on 'nid' (the "des_cbc" EVP_CIPHER is +not an interoperable implementation of "aes_256_cbc"), RSA_METHODs are +necessarily interoperable and don't have different flavours, only different +implementations. In other words, the ENGINE_TABLE for RSA will either be empty, +or will have a single ENGING_PILE hashed to by the 'nid' 1 and that pile +represents ENGINEs that implement the single "type" of RSA there is. + +Cleanup - the registration and unregistration may pose questions about how +cleanup works with the ENGINE_PILE doing all this caching nonsense (ie. when the +application or EVP_CIPHER code releases its last reference to an ENGINE, the +ENGINE_PILE code may still have references and thus those ENGINEs will stay +hooked in forever). The way this is handled is via "unregistration". With these +new ENGINE changes, an abstract ENGINE can be loaded and initialised, but that +is an algorithm-agnostic process. Even if initialised, it will not have +registered any of its implementations (to do so would link all class "table" +code despite the fact the application may use only ciphers, for example). This +is deliberately a distinct step. Moreover, registration and unregistration has +nothing to do with whether an ENGINE is *functional* or not (ie. you can even +register an ENGINE and its implementations without it being operational, you may +not even have the drivers to make it operate). What actually happens with +respect to cleanup is managed inside eng_lib.c with the "engine_cleanup_***" +functions. These functions are internal-only and each part of ENGINE code that +could require cleanup will, upon performing its first allocation, register a +callback with the "engine_cleanup" code. The other part of this that makes it +tick is that the ENGINE_TABLE instantiations (tb_***.c) use NULL as their +initialised state. So if RSA code asks for an ENGINE and no ENGINE has +registered an implementation, the code will simply return NULL and the tb_rsa.c +state will be unchanged. Thus, no cleanup is required unless registration takes +place. ENGINE_cleanup() will simply iterate across a list of registered cleanup +callbacks calling each in turn, and will then internally delete its own storage +(a STACK). When a cleanup callback is next registered (eg. if the cleanup() is +part of a gracefull restart and the application wants to cleanup all state then +start again), the internal STACK storage will be freshly allocated. This is much +the same as the situation in the ENGINE_TABLE instantiations ... NULL is the +initialised state, so only modification operations (not queries) will cause that +code to have to register a cleanup. + +What else? The bignum callbacks and associated ENGINE functions have been +removed for two obvious reasons; (i) there was no way to generalise them to the +mechanism now used by RSA/DSA/..., because there's no such thing as a BIGNUM +method, and (ii) because of (i), there was no meaningful way for library or +application code to automatically hook and use ENGINE supplied bignum functions +anyway. Also, ENGINE_cpy() has been removed (although an internal-only version +exists) - the idea of providing an ENGINE_cpy() function probably wasn't a good +one and now certainly doesn't make sense in any generalised way. Some of the +RSA, DSA, DH, and RAND functions that were fiddled during the original ENGINE +changes have now, as a consequence, been reverted back. This is because the +hooking of ENGINE is now automatic (and passive, it can interally use a NULL +ENGINE pointer to simply ignore ENGINE from then on). + +Hell, that should be enough for now ... comments welcome: geoff@openssl.org + |