Verification using ED25519 keys for functionaries returns error
anotherbridge opened this issue · 9 comments
General information:
I am using a similar setup as described in #207.
In the demo project I replaced the keys of bob and carl by ED25519 versions in PEM format. I created the keys in the root.layout using the command in-toto key layout bob/carl.
- Version (tag or commit): checked out repo at state of commit 3dcfea3
- Operating system (Linux/Mac/Windows): Debian 11.6 x86 architecture
- Go version:
go version go1.20.1 - Go build flags (if any):
Description of the bug:
Running all the steps in demo-project works without an issue unless I want to verify the result. When running the verification I get the following:
in-toto verify --layout root.layout --layout-keys alice.pub
inspection failed: invalid signature: crypto/rsa: verification error
Yet when creating everything up until the verification step using the Golang verison of in-toto and then at the verification step I use the python version instead the verification is successful. The command I ran in the end is:
in-toto-verify --layout root.layout --layout-key alice.pub
The exit code is zero as it would be expected.
Due to the error message I am assuming that instead of using ED25519 for the verification of the corresponding signatures, RSA is used.
Hi @anotherbridge, could you share the layout you generated?
Hi @adityasaky, of course,
here is the layout:
root.layout.txt
And additionally, these are the public keys:
bob.pub.txt
carl.pub.txt
Can you also share the link metadata? Thanks!
Here's the complete final_product directory before running the verification step:
final_product.tar.gz
Hi @anotherbridge, sorry for the delay. The issue is the same as this: in-toto/in-toto#186 (comment). We should, IMO, get rid of private altogether from serialized metadata in this implementation. In summary, in-toto-golang, when canonicalizing the layout to verify the signature, includes an empty private string for each key in keyval. The layout created by the python implementation omits this. I can verify it works with the following layout which I re-signed using Alice's key from the demo:
{
"signatures": [
{
"keyid": "556caebdc0877eed53d419b60eddb1e57fa773e4e31d70698b588f3e9cc48b35",
"sig": "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"
}
],
"signed": {
"_type": "layout",
"expires": "2023-03-23T10:30:24Z",
"inspect": [
{
"_type": "inspection",
"expected_materials": [
[
"MATCH",
"demo-project.tar.gz",
"WITH",
"PRODUCTS",
"FROM",
"package"
],
[
"ALLOW",
".keep"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"alice.pub"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"root.layout"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"*.link"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"expected_products": [
[
"MATCH",
"demo-project/foo.py",
"WITH",
"PRODUCTS",
"FROM",
"update-version"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"demo-project/.git/*"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"demo-project.tar.gz"
],
[
"ALLOW",
".keep"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"alice.pub"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"root.layout"
],
[
"ALLOW",
"*.link"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"name": "untar",
"run": [
"tar",
"xzf",
"demo-project.tar.gz"
]
}
],
"keys": {
"2a304ef310d749d20daa25a5de8439fd4fa2a7abadfdb85ea61d6baa750c0562": {
"keyid": "2a304ef310d749d20daa25a5de8439fd4fa2a7abadfdb85ea61d6baa750c0562",
"keyid_hash_algorithms": [
"sha256",
"sha512"
],
"keytype": "ed25519",
"keyval": {
"private": "",
"public": "9d608e405d8957d8b3a3c10e1b5c140464bda00b22c48b09b39fb1d159058a40"
},
"scheme": "ed25519"
},
"36a4147f326b50061d7f3c39355a82af9415e5e75d8dff18d745be40a2933092": {
"keyid": "36a4147f326b50061d7f3c39355a82af9415e5e75d8dff18d745be40a2933092",
"keyid_hash_algorithms": [
"sha256",
"sha512"
],
"keytype": "ed25519",
"keyval": {
"private": "",
"public": "0fbdf3d86eb3284613def3b2b5a6333ed0f1c3fd8ac34dbccbb5ddfe73f75c88"
},
"scheme": "ed25519"
}
},
"readme": "",
"steps": [
{
"_type": "step",
"expected_command": [
"git",
"clone",
"https://github.com/in-toto/demo-project.git"
],
"expected_materials": [],
"expected_products": [
[
"CREATE",
"demo-project/foo.py"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"name": "clone",
"pubkeys": [
"36a4147f326b50061d7f3c39355a82af9415e5e75d8dff18d745be40a2933092"
],
"threshold": 1
},
{
"_type": "step",
"expected_command": [],
"expected_materials": [
[
"MATCH",
"demo-project/*",
"WITH",
"PRODUCTS",
"FROM",
"clone"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"expected_products": [
[
"MODIFY",
"demo-project/foo.py"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"name": "update-version",
"pubkeys": [
"36a4147f326b50061d7f3c39355a82af9415e5e75d8dff18d745be40a2933092"
],
"threshold": 1
},
{
"_type": "step",
"expected_command": [
"tar",
"--exclude",
".git",
"-zcvf",
"demo-project.tar.gz",
"demo-project"
],
"expected_materials": [
[
"MATCH",
"demo-project/*",
"WITH",
"PRODUCTS",
"FROM",
"update-version"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"expected_products": [
[
"CREATE",
"demo-project.tar.gz"
],
[
"DISALLOW",
"*"
]
],
"name": "package",
"pubkeys": [
"2a304ef310d749d20daa25a5de8439fd4fa2a7abadfdb85ea61d6baa750c0562"
],
"threshold": 1
}
]
}
}We could likely update https://github.com/in-toto/in-toto-golang/blob/master/in_toto/model.go#L34 to make the Private field private (pun intended) and add interfaces to populate it when loading a key to sign something. Do you think you could explore this? 😄
@adityasaky Sorry for the long delay. First of all I can confirm that adding a private field with an empty string resolves the problem. Second, I am personally not yet experienced with Golang, thus at the moment I am not able to sufficiently explore the suggested change. Yet, I would be pleased to test any updates that have been made regarding this problem.
Picking this up with #224. I can confirm that the root.layout.txt signature from this PR can be verified. I didn't run the full in-toto verify workflow because I don't have all the metadata anymore. But, the missing private field is not added in by in-toto-golang anymore as far as I can tell.
@anotherbridge I'm going to close this issue for now as the omitempty seems to ensure it's not part of the canonicalized json representation. Feel free to add info / reopen if I've missed something!