Our cryptanalysis consisted of performing a precomputation on the primes given in two popular sets of weak Diffie-Hellman parameters. After performing this computation, we are able to break any Diffie-Hellman key exchange using these primes in real time. These parameters are commonly used in DHE_EXPORT ciphers—these ciphers were intentionally designed to be weak to satisfy old regulation standards in the 1990s, and require that the prime number used, \(p\) be short (512-bits). This attack is only feasible because the parameters are weak.
The first is hard-coded in Apache httpd from version 2.1.5 until 2.4.7, and is the default group used for DHE_EXPORT cipher suites on 7% of the Top 1 Million sites. Across the entire Internet, it is used by more than a million HTTPS servers (3% of all HTTPS servers). This group first appeared in 2005.
Diffie-Hellman-Parameters: (512 bit) prime: 00:9f:db:8b:8a:00:45:44:f0:04:5f:17:37:d0:ba: 2e:0b:27:4c:df:1a:9f:58:82:18:fb:43:53:16:a1: 6e:37:41:71:fd:19:d8:d8:f3:7c:39:bf:86:3f:d6: 0e:3e:30:06:80:a3:03:0c:6e:4c:37:57:d0:8f:70: e6:aa:87:10:33 generator: 2 (0x2)
The second is bundled with the OpenSSL library in the file dh512.pem. It is the default prime used by the OpenSSL s_server program for both DHE and DHE_EXPORT ciphers This program is mostly used in test configurations, not in production websites. The group first appeared in a precursor of OpenSSL, SSLeay 0.5.1a, in 1995.
Diffie-Hellman-Parameters: (512 bit) prime: 00:da:58:3c:16:d9:85:22:89:d0:e4:af:75:6f:4c: ca:92:dd:4b:e5:33:b8:04:fb:0f:ed:94:ef:9c:8a: 44:03:ed:57:46:50:d3:69:99:db:29:d7:76:27:6b: a2:d3:d4:12:e2:18:f4:dd:1e:08:4c:f6:d8:00:3e: 7c:47:74:e8:33 generator: 2 (0x2)
We used CADO-NFS to perform two weeks worth of precomputation; one week for each of the primes. This enables us to calculate secret keys exchanged using Diffie-Hellman by computing the discrete log of a particular key exchange message in just a few minutes. Furthermore, since the Apache prime is used by a large number of servers, the precomputation cost can be amortized over compromised connections to any of these servers.
Attack. This attack requires that the server default to using a Diffie-Hellman key exchange with 512-bit parameters. In this attack, there is a passive network adversary able to eavesdrop, who can obtain a transcript of the communication between the client and server.
The video below, recorded in April 2015, demonstrates that a connection to tips.fbi.gov can be recorded and decrypted by an eavesdropper. The connection uses the OpenSSL 512-bit Diffie-Hellman group that we have already performed precomputation for. Since the group is small, without precomputation this process would only take one week. With our precomputation, we can break the Diffie-Hellman key exchange in minutes. This enables us to compute the connection keys and decrypt the recorded conversation quickly.
Susceptibility. This attack works on most popular browsers and TLS libraries. For example, Firefox, Chrome, Internet Explorer on Windows 8.1 and earlier, Safari, OpenSSL, and JSSE were all vulnerable. Some clients were secure because they rejected sufficiently small primes. For example, IE on Windows 10 rejected primes shorter than 1024-bit, and GnuTLS rejected primes shorter than 728-bit.
Prevention. As of May 2015, www.fbi.gov has disabled all DHE cipher suites, preventing this attack. This attack can also be prevented if the client (web browser) rejects short 512-bit parameters. 512-bit DHE is past its prime.
We note that www.fbi.gov was one of a large number of websites affected by the Logjam Attack. While sites need to patch, mounting the attack requires non-negligible expertise to mount, and likely has not been widely exploited in the wild.
Attack. This attack only requires that a server support 512-bit parameters, but has a greater requirement of the client and attacker. The server, in this case, only needs to support DHE_EXPORT cipher suites or use 512-bit parameters in non-export DHE ciphers. The client must be using the TLS False Start extension; that is, the client sends application data before receiving the server's Finished message in the TLS handshake. Finally, the adversary must be an active man-in-the-middle, able to intercept, alter, and forward network traffic.
The attack proceeds in several steps:
At the end of this sequence, the attacker has recorded all the connection data, including the server and client's ephemeral public keys. The attacker can then obtain the secret key used to encrypt the transmitted data, by computing the discrete log of one of these public keys. Once the secret key is obtained, the attacker can decrypt the application data. In the demo, this allows the attacker to steal the user's credentials.
The demonstration video below demonstrates connections to the webmail interface of Network Solutions being intercepted by a man-in-the-middle to steal the user's credentials.
In the video above, computing the discrete log takes several minutes on a laptop. This can be optimized to be much faster, but in this attack scenario, the attacker has offline access to the data, and therefore has no limit on the time to needed to compute the discrete log and obtain the decryption key.
Susceptibility. The demo above uses Firefox 35: the last version of Firefox to allow False Start for DHE cipher suites. The attack works for all browsers that use False Start for any DHE cipher suite, such as Google Chrome 41 on all platforms except Linux. Internet Explorer also enables False Start for DHE cipher suites and is vulnerable to this attack, but it only supports DHE with DSA certificates, which are rarely supported by servers on the public Internet.
Prevention. Clients can prevent this attack by rejecting short Diffie-Hellman parameters. Servers can prevent this by disabling DHE_EXPORT, and using strong parameters for non-export DHE.
We note that www.networksolutionsemail.com was one of a large number of websites affected by the Logjam Attack. While sites need to patch, mounting the attack requires non-negligible expertise to mount, and likely has not been widely exploited in the wild.
Attack. This attack is an online version of Attack II. The requirements for the attacks are the same, with one exception. In this case, rather than require the client support TLS False Start, we instead require the client be willing to wait a significant amount of time for the handshake to complete. This is because the attacker must compute the connection key during the handshake process, but computing the key takes several minutes. Some clients have short timeouts which would close the connection before the attacker finishes computing the key. If the client leaves the connection open for long enough, the attacker is able to fully impersonate the server to the client.
The attack proceeds as follows:
The video below demonstrates a popular unattended installation method being used by an attacker to trick a user into downloading and executing arbitrary code.
Susceptibility. Computing the discrete log can take several minutes. A client is vulnerable only if it continues waiting and leaves the connection open while the discrete log is being computed. By sending fake TLS warning alerts, we have been able to keep handshake connections open for more than 11 minutes in Firefox. This is unrealistic, as users will obviously not tolerate a 11 minute delay to load a webpage. More realistically, as the video above shows, we have also been able to mount the attack on non-browser OpenSSL clients such as curl and git. These applications are typically used to download batch data, are often launched in the background, and are therefore more often willing to wait for long connection times. Alternatively, the attack could be implemented against a connection opened in the background by an already-loaded webpage. We also note our implementation is not optimized, and performance could likely be improved.
Prevention. Once again, clients can prevent this vulnerability by rejecting short Diffie-Hellman parameters. While forcing short timeouts currently blocks this attack, every year hardware and algorithmic improvements reduce the time required to compute a discrete log given the precomputation. Short timeouts are unlikely to prevent this attack in the future.
We note that www.tcl.tk was one of a large number of websites affected by the Logjam Attack. While sites need to patch, mounting the attack requires non-negligible expertise to mount, and likely has not been widely exploited in the wild.
Attack. This attack is against servers that use poorly generated primes, and does not rely on precomputation. It was originally published by van Oorschot and Wiener in 1996. Despite this, our study found over 150 vulnerable hosts. Servers may be vulnerable if they do not verify that groups have a special form that is known to be secure (examples include "safe" primes or DSA groups) and additionally for either client or server to choose a short private exponent, a common server-side optimization. In this case, an attacker may be able to recover a secret exponent using simple calculations. It enables an attacker to decrypt application data and fully impersonate the server to the client.
The video below demonstrates a connection to a web interface of a messaging system being intercepted by a man-in-the-middle to steal user's credentials.
The attack proceeds as follows:
This scenario is similar to Attack I. However, because the parameters chosen by the server are weak, it takes just a few seconds for the attacker to compute the connection keys, without causing any user-noticeable delay.
Susceptibility. Clients and servers are vulnerable to this attack if they use short exponents with Diffie-Hellman key exchanges using primes that have not been verified to either be "safe" or be generated as part of a DSA group. A "safe" prime is a prime of the form \(p = 2q+1\) for some prime \(q\); a DSA group enforces that the generator generates a subgroup of large prime order. Many Diffie-Hellman implementations use exponents as small as, for example, 160 bits with a 1024-bit prime modulus as a performance optimization. This is not known to decrease security when using "safe" or DSA primes, but when using an insecurely generated prime (for example one which has been generated at random without testing further properties) this can allow an attacker to easily break the key exchange.
Prevention. This attack can be prevented by using either "safe" primes or a well-generated DSA group. Implementations can also mitigate this attack by using full-sized exponents, which are likely to be secure even when used in combination with randomly generated non-"safe" primes.
