[security] Migrating from library version 2.1 to 2.2
-
I'm looking forward to it become stable! I've been playing with the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option and I love it! No more neighbours picking up my data!
-
@anticimex I just noticed. Brilliant.
One thing that I must admit is that I am a little sad that the option I was advocating for about a year ago hasn't really become the option I was hoping for. I suspect that's because I didn't now enough about the difference between signing and encryption, so I was unable to argue well enough what I was looking for.
Perhaps it can still be a feature request for 2.3: the ability to just put a password at the top of the scripts, and then automatically have encrypted communication on the network. Without signing. As this allows me (and other relative n00bs) to keep using my low-memory Nano's. Because when I tried to implement the current easy option I ran out of memory on almost all the nodes. Which prompted my question about the future of MySensors, and the implied need to upgrade to ARM based devices.
Again, I know what I am looking for is very poor security. But all I want is to have a really easy pathway (high usability) that lowers the incentive for my neighbour to snoop my network. To go from "hey, look, a node has popped up in Domoticz. Let's see how much power my neighbour uses" to "no node has popped up in Domoticz".
As I read in the Raspberry gateway thread, creating a simple, encrypted network has in a way become harder. Now all nodes need their own unique key. Hence the sadness, as it seems that upgrading my Nano network to an encrypted state without having to dive into technical details, code generation, signing process and allround effort is actually further away than it was before.
At least, that's what it seems like. I would be happy to be wrong :-)
-
@gohan feature toggles for the rPi gateways are documented: https://www.mysensors.org/apidocs/group__RaspberryPiGateway.html
Regarding the configuration of these features, I don't think there is anything in doxygen for that yet, but you should get a list with
mysgw -hor--help -
@anticimex I just noticed. Brilliant.
One thing that I must admit is that I am a little sad that the option I was advocating for about a year ago hasn't really become the option I was hoping for. I suspect that's because I didn't now enough about the difference between signing and encryption, so I was unable to argue well enough what I was looking for.
Perhaps it can still be a feature request for 2.3: the ability to just put a password at the top of the scripts, and then automatically have encrypted communication on the network. Without signing. As this allows me (and other relative n00bs) to keep using my low-memory Nano's. Because when I tried to implement the current easy option I ran out of memory on almost all the nodes. Which prompted my question about the future of MySensors, and the implied need to upgrade to ARM based devices.
Again, I know what I am looking for is very poor security. But all I want is to have a really easy pathway (high usability) that lowers the incentive for my neighbour to snoop my network. To go from "hey, look, a node has popped up in Domoticz. Let's see how much power my neighbour uses" to "no node has popped up in Domoticz".
As I read in the Raspberry gateway thread, creating a simple, encrypted network has in a way become harder. Now all nodes need their own unique key. Hence the sadness, as it seems that upgrading my Nano network to an encrypted state without having to dive into technical details, code generation, signing process and allround effort is actually further away than it was before.
At least, that's what it seems like. I would be happy to be wrong :-)
@alowhum I don't understand what you mean? You have MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD. It enables signing and encryption with out any further configurations. Why would you not want to enable signing? And the password option is also available on the raspberry pi port as documented here: https://www.mysensors.org/apidocs/group__RaspberryPiGateway.html
The documentation is unclear on the implications of the password flag, but it does enable encryption as well:--my-signing-password=<PASSWORD>The general documentation on security details the use of the password flag: https://www.mysensors.org/apidocs/group__SigningSettingGrpPub.html#gaedf8ec407fbde609a520ea0d95da2aac
I am afraid things can't get much simpler than this.
If you disagree please elaborate on what you think can be simplified.If you for some reason still want (very crappy) encryption only, just change in MyConfig.h to disable the signing flags to not enable them. I don't want to clutter the code with more switches for security. It helps no-one.
https://github.com/mysensors/MySensors/blob/development/MyConfig.h#L1523 -
Hey @Anticimex, thanks for the reply.
The simple version is really great, don't get me wrong. Absolutely great usability!
The reason I would like a non-signing option is that it saves a lot of ram. By only using encryption it should be possible to continue using Arduino Nano's as nodes.
I tried using the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option on my Nano's, and the result was that most of my sketches became too big or unstable.
There just isn't enough space/ram for both hardcore security and sensor libraries.
Thanks for explaining that I might be able to 'criple' the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option. I would suggest that this 'crippling' could perhaps become a feature in itself called "MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD (without the signing).
-
Hey @Anticimex, thanks for the reply.
The simple version is really great, don't get me wrong. Absolutely great usability!
The reason I would like a non-signing option is that it saves a lot of ram. By only using encryption it should be possible to continue using Arduino Nano's as nodes.
I tried using the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option on my Nano's, and the result was that most of my sketches became too big or unstable.
There just isn't enough space/ram for both hardcore security and sensor libraries.
Thanks for explaining that I might be able to 'criple' the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option. I would suggest that this 'crippling' could perhaps become a feature in itself called "MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD (without the signing).
@alowhum I will consider it for 2.2.1. But I also need to mind the complexity of the overall functionality. I don't want the security solution to grow more into a beast than it already is.
The functionality you seek is really simple to implement. But gives even more options for a user to decide on. And although that is for some a great thing it is not for everyone.
I will see if I can somehow structure the documentation to outline all the configuration settings and try to give each a elaborate description on pros and cons. -
Hey @Anticimex, thanks for the reply.
The simple version is really great, don't get me wrong. Absolutely great usability!
The reason I would like a non-signing option is that it saves a lot of ram. By only using encryption it should be possible to continue using Arduino Nano's as nodes.
I tried using the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option on my Nano's, and the result was that most of my sketches became too big or unstable.
There just isn't enough space/ram for both hardcore security and sensor libraries.
Thanks for explaining that I might be able to 'criple' the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option. I would suggest that this 'crippling' could perhaps become a feature in itself called "MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD (without the signing).
I did have same issues, with new version, when was in testing stage.
Try at the top of sketch add these:
#define MY_DISABLE_SIGNAL_REPORT #define MY_SPLASH_SCREEN_DISABLEDYou save a lot of space. All my nodes are on ATMEGA328 and no space issues. Max node with signing + encryption + relay + temp uses 67% of space
-
I did have same issues, with new version, when was in testing stage.
Try at the top of sketch add these:
#define MY_DISABLE_SIGNAL_REPORT #define MY_SPLASH_SCREEN_DISABLEDYou save a lot of space. All my nodes are on ATMEGA328 and no space issues. Max node with signing + encryption + relay + temp uses 67% of space
@sineverba there is also a documentation section on this: https://www.mysensors.org/apidocs/group__memorysavings.html
-
I did have same issues, with new version, when was in testing stage.
Try at the top of sketch add these:
#define MY_DISABLE_SIGNAL_REPORT #define MY_SPLASH_SCREEN_DISABLEDYou save a lot of space. All my nodes are on ATMEGA328 and no space issues. Max node with signing + encryption + relay + temp uses 67% of space
@sineverba I also believe the signal report flag is reversed nowadays, and is an opt-in feature and not an opt-out feature, using MY_SIGNAL_REPORT_ENABLED which defaults to "off". Hence it is not listed in the memory savings section of the documentation, but the documentation of MY_SIGNAL_REPORT_ENABLED does warn that it adds about 1k of flash use.
-
@sineverba I also believe the signal report flag is reversed nowadays, and is an opt-in feature and not an opt-out feature, using MY_SIGNAL_REPORT_ENABLED which defaults to "off". Hence it is not listed in the memory savings section of the documentation, but the documentation of MY_SIGNAL_REPORT_ENABLED does warn that it adds about 1k of flash use.
@anticimex Ah, I did not know, cause I'm in 2.2.0 rc2 (when something works... don't touch it! :D )
-
@alowhum check the development branch. Simple password system has been reworked. Also, documentation is updated.
@anticimex Awesome!
So I had a look at the new code, and is this a fair summary?:
- Simple encryption and simple signing are now two separate functions you can call at the top of your script by adding a line with a password: MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD and MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD.
- You can also just put "MY_SECURITY_SIMPLE_PASSWD" at the top of your script, and that will do both in one go. This used to be called the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option, which also did both.
MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD is now called MY_SECURITY_SIMPLE_PASSWD. MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD only affects signing, and a new flag, MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD only affects encryption. MY_SECURITY_SIMPLE_PASSWD enable both these flags.This is simply wonderful.
- More choice and flexibility for the end user.
- Get some simple security on your existing Arduino hardware.
Thank you so much for this.
-
@anticimex Awesome!
So I had a look at the new code, and is this a fair summary?:
- Simple encryption and simple signing are now two separate functions you can call at the top of your script by adding a line with a password: MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD and MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD.
- You can also just put "MY_SECURITY_SIMPLE_PASSWD" at the top of your script, and that will do both in one go. This used to be called the MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD option, which also did both.
MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD is now called MY_SECURITY_SIMPLE_PASSWD. MY_SIGNING_SIMPLE_PASSWD only affects signing, and a new flag, MY_ENCRYPTION_SIMPLE_PASSWD only affects encryption. MY_SECURITY_SIMPLE_PASSWD enable both these flags.This is simply wonderful.
- More choice and flexibility for the end user.
- Get some simple security on your existing Arduino hardware.
Thank you so much for this.
@alowhum you are welcome. Just remember that simple in this context also mean weak. Storing the secrets in the sketch is a huge security implication on targets that does not support readout protection. Atmga328p among others.
Do you feel secure today? No? Start requiring some signatures and feel better tomorrow ;)
-
@alowhum you are welcome. Just remember that simple in this context also mean weak. Storing the secrets in the sketch is a huge security implication on targets that does not support readout protection. Atmga328p among others.
@anticimex I understand. But if my neighbour has access to the nodes inside my house, then I have a bigger security problem :-)
-
@anticimex I understand. But if my neighbour has access to the nodes inside my house, then I have a bigger security problem :-)
@alowhum right, but if you update your sketches OTA, he can potentially sniff your key OTA as well and then he does not need to enter your house ;)
Do you feel secure today? No? Start requiring some signatures and feel better tomorrow ;)
-
@alowhum right, but if you update your sketches OTA, he can potentially sniff your key OTA as well and then he does not need to enter your house ;)
@anticimex Heh, then I will invite him/her over for tea congratulate them. And then apply some verbal security :-P
Can Arduino nano's be updated OTA?
-
@anticimex Heh, then I will invite him/her over for tea congratulate them. And then apply some verbal security :-P
Can Arduino nano's be updated OTA?
