Erlang bindings for NaCl / libsodium
This library provides bindings for the libsodium cryptographic library
for Erlang. Originally called NaCl by Bernstein, Lange and Schwabe[0],
Frank Denis took the source and made it far more portable in the
libsodium library. The enacl project is somewhat misnamed, as it uses
libsodium as the underlying driver.
Note: If installing on systems which cuts packages into
subpackages, make sure you also get the “-dev” package containing
the header files necessary in order to compile software linking to
libsodium.
To build the software execute:
make
or
rebar compile
To build and run licensed eqc test execute:
make eqc_run
To build and run eqc-mini version of test execute:
make eqc_mini_run
This package draws heavy inspiration from “erlang-nacl” by Tony
Garnock-Jones, and started its life with a gently nod in that
direction. However, it is a rewrite and it alters lots of code from
Tony’s original work.
In addition, I would like to thank Steve Vinoski, Rickard Green, and
Sverker Eriksson for providing the Dirty Scheduler API in the first
place.
In general, consult the libsodium documentation at Libsodium documentation
The original NaCl documentation is nowadays largely superceded by the
libsodium documentation, but it is still worth a visit NaCl website
but also note that our interface has full Edoc documentation,
generated by executing
rebar3 doc
In general, the primitives provided by NaCl are intermediate-level
primitives. Rather than you having to select a cipher suite, it is
selected for you, and primitives are provided at a higher level.
However, their correct use is still needed in order to be secure:
box
public-keybench
iodata()
binary()
data. The library itself will convertiodata()
to binaries internally, so you don’t have to do it atiodata()
enacl:randombytes/1
function provides portable access to therand
module of Erlang. The other alternative is the crypto
See CHANGELOG.md
The NaCl cryptographic library provides a number of different
cryptographic primitives. In the following, we split up the different
generic primitives and explain them briefly.
A note on Nonces: The crypto API makes use of “cryptographic
nonces”, that is arbitrary numbers which are used only once. For these
primitives to be secure it is important to consult the NaCl
documentation on their choice. They are large values so generating
them randomly ensures security, provided the random number generator
uses a sufficiently large period. If you end up using, say, the nonce7
every time in communication while using the same keys, then the
security falls.
The reason you can pick the nonce values is because some uses are
better off using a nonce-construction based on monotonically
increasing numbers, while other uses do not. The advantage of a
sequence is that it can be used to reject older messages in the stream
and protect against replay attacks. So the correct use is up to the
application in many cases.
This implements standard Public/Secret key cryptography. The
implementation roughly consists of two major sections:
box
primitive whichThis implements cryptography where there is a shared secret key between parties.
secret box
primitive ink
. The box alsoXOR
with a message to encrypt it. NoXOR
Doing crypto right in Erlang is not that easy. For one, the crypto
system has to be rather fast, which rules out Erlang as the main
vehicle. Second, cryptographic systems must be void of timing attacks.
This mandates we write the code in a language where we can avoid such
timing attacks, which leaves only C as a contender, more or less. The
obvious way to handle this is by the use of NIF implementations, but
most C code will run to its conclusion once set off for processing.
This is a major problem for a system which needs to keep its latency
in check. The solution taken by this library is to use the new Dirty
Scheduler API of Erlang in order to provide a safe way to handle the
long-running cryptographic processing. It keeps the cryptographic
primitives on the dirty schedulers and thus it avoids the major
problem.
Focus has first and foremost been on the correct use of dirty
schedulers, without any regard for speed. The plan is to extend the
underlying implementation, while keeping the API stable. We can
precompute keys for some operations for instance, which will yield a
speedup.
Also, while the standard crypto
bindings in Erlang does a great job
at providing cryptographic primitives, these are based on OpenSSL,
which is known to be highly problematic in many ways. It is not as
easy to use the OpenSSL library correctly as it is with these
bindings. Rather than providing a low-level cipher suite, NaCl
provides intermediate level primitives constructed as to protect the
user against typical low-level cryptographic gotchas and problems.
To avoid long running NIFs, the library switches to the use of dirty
schedulers for large encryption tasks. We investigated the Dirty
Scheduler switch overhead with DTrace on FreeBSD and found it to be
roughly 5μs in typical cases. Thus, we target calls taking at least
35μs is being easier to run directly on the dirty scheduler, as the
overhead for switching is thus going to be less than 15%. This means
very small operations are run directly on the BEAM scheduler, but as
soon as the operation takes a little longer, the switch overhead is
not large enough to warrant the current schedulers involvement.
In turn, some operations are always run on the dirty scheduler
because they take a long time in every case. This setup is far simpler
for most operations, unless the operation is performance sensitive and
allows small messages.
The tests were conducted on a Core 2 Duo machine, with newer machines
perhaps being able to switch faster. There are plans to rerun these
tests on OSX and Illumos as well, in order to investigate the numbers
on more platforms.
Every primitive has been stress-tested through the use of Erlang
QuickCheck with both positive and negative testing. This has been
used to check against memory leaks as well as correct invocation.
Please report any error so we can extend the test cases to include a
randomized test which captures the problem so we generically catch
every problem in a given class of errors.
Positive and negative testing refers to Type I and Type II errors in
statistical testing. This means false positives—given a valid input
the function rejects it; as well as false negatives—given an invalid
input the functions fails to reject that input.
The problem however, is that while we are testing the API level, we
can’t really test the strength of the cryptographic primitives. We can
verify their correctness by trying different standard correctness
tests for the primitives, verifying that the output matches the
expected one given a specific input. But there is no way we can show
that the cryptographic primitive has the strength we want. Thus, we
opted to mostly test the API and its invocation for stability.
Also, in addition to correctness, testing the system like this makes
sure we have no memory leaks as they will show themselves under the
extensive QuickCheck test cases we run. It has been verified there are
no leaks in the code.
[0] Other people have worked on bits and pieces of NaCl. These are
just the 3 main authors. Please see the page NaCl
for the full list of authors.