Exetools Armadillo ECDSA-113
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register Forum Rules FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

 Notices https://forum.exetools.com This is the ONLY ONE domain that we use. Follow @exetools on Twitter and send me a message, I will choose whether to send the invitation code. Any password problems please mailto: 883600(at)qq(dot)com

 Thread Tools Display Modes
#1
08-17-2017, 23:15
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
Armadillo ECDSA-113

Hi
A month ago I launched my first attack on a armadillo protected target that was using level 10 armadillo license system (ECDSA)

Level10 is ECDSA-113 which of course is using Elliptic Curve.
The curve size is 113 bit and the order of the public point is 112 bit.
Order: "5192296858534827627896703833467507"

The curve is a koblitz curve and the base is usually Optimal Normal Base Type 2 which is very slow when implemented in software. (Well. I was not able to speed it up to much)

To solve the ecdlp on such a curve I first thought that the number of iteration needed would be ~sqrt(2^112) == 2^56 but for the koblitz curve there are speedups.

First speedup would be using the frobenius map and second would be using negation map.
For this one can expect a speedup of ~sqrt(113*2) and this brings us to a total number of iteration ~2^52
For the slow ONB2 curve this woule be too much (I think) but now the fun starts.
There exist a isomorphic base (or there are many of them) but the fastest I could find is the polynomial base with the irreducible polynom x^113 + x^9 +1.
Going from ONB2 to polynomial base was a bit pain at first but when you know what to do it's pretty easy.

Also in 2010 intel introduced the CLMUL instruction that can do carry less multiplication (polynomial multiplication) in ASM and reducing modulo x^113 + x^9 +1 is pretty fast when using xmm registers.

So the speed of the first solver I tested using the ONB2 code was about 20.000 iterations/sec.
The one I ended up running did 46.000.000 iterations/sec running on a Core i7 CPU with 8 threads.
My total combined speed was about 600mill/sec and after 2^50 iterations I solved ECDLP for this curve/target.

I guess armadillo is not to much used any more so I guess all this was a bit to late. Or perhaps others have done this before me? I don't know.

But if anyone know of a good/cool target using this protection it would be fun to try again.

If any questions then just shoot.
 The Following 3 Users Gave Reputation+1 to contextrax For This Useful Post: deepzero (08-18-2017), nulli (08-22-2017), tonyweb (08-26-2017)
 The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to contextrax For This Useful Post: alekine322 (08-18-2017), cachito (09-25-2017), deepzero (08-18-2017), elephant (08-22-2017), jump (08-22-2017), niculaita (08-17-2017), nulli (08-22-2017), sendersu (08-18-2017), tonyweb (08-26-2017), WaSt3d_ByTes (08-18-2017), WRP (08-18-2017)
#2
08-18-2017, 02:42
 tofu-sensei Friend Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 112 Rept. Given: 1 Rept. Rcvd 14 Times in 8 Posts Thanks Given: 1 Thanks Rcvd at 22 Times in 12 Posts
So... It effectively took three weeks to solve?
#3
08-18-2017, 03:30
 UniSoft Family Join Date: May 2010 Location: Shenzhen, China Posts: 122 Rept. Given: 23 Rept. Rcvd 252 Times in 40 Posts Thanks Given: 21 Thanks Rcvd at 373 Times in 71 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by contextrax But if anyone know of a good/cool target using this protection
Visual Assist X 10.9.2231.0
#4
08-18-2017, 05:09
 mr.exodia Super Moderator Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 859 Rept. Given: 501 Rept. Rcvd 1,155 Times in 309 Posts Thanks Given: 95 Thanks Rcvd at 773 Times in 365 Posts
Very interesting! I could integrate this in my Armadillo Key Tool (https://github.com/mrexodia/akt)...

The previous attack (as far as I know) was on a weak implementation by Baboon (http://baboon.rce.free.fr/index.php?post/2010/09/04/Armadillo-mange-des-ours-en-slips) but I don't think a brute force approach was tested in public.

You can get the best target by making your own unpackme, or try Armadillo itself...

The latest public (and custom) v9.60 uses:

Code:
```  Short V3 Level 10:
Chk : B5EC5364
Sym: BDA4FA1C
BaseP : 1570789295 (Size=50, Diff=112C, MD5=0F656698)
Pub.X : 2127081270816270912006137526418476
Pub.Y : 7206819234412870204027887633390168```
Feel free to ping me if you need something...
__________________
x64dbg: http://x64dbg.com
My Blog: http://mrexodia.cf
 The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mr.exodia For This Useful Post: contextrax (08-18-2017)
#5
08-18-2017, 06:20
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tofu-sensei So... It effectively took three weeks to solve?
Lets say four weeks but I think I was lucky this time only needed 2^50 iterations. (or lets say extremely lucky)
ECDLP is based on the birthday paradox so you never know exactly the among of work.
2^52 iterations would required 4 times more work.
#6
08-18-2017, 06:30
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by mr.exodia You can get the best target by making your own unpackme, or try Armadillo itself...
I would not find it to interested breaking my own ecc parameters

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mr.exodia The latest public (and custom) v9.60 uses: Code: ``` Short V3 Level 10: Chk : B5EC5364 Sym: BDA4FA1C BaseP : 1570789295 (Size=50, Diff=112C, MD5=0F656698) Pub.X : 2127081270816270912006137526418476 Pub.Y : 7206819234412870204027887633390168``` Feel free to ping me if you need something...
This is the real ecc parameters for armadillo itself?
I thought armadillo was obsolete
 The Following User Says Thank You to contextrax For This Useful Post: the_beginner (04-21-2019)
#7
08-18-2017, 06:54
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
Would anyone be interested in running an attack on say armadillo?
This require running the solver on their pc and collect distinguished points.
More CPU's will give faster result.

Also if anyone are familiar with GPU coding them perhaps this could also be implemented and run on gfx cards.
#8
08-18-2017, 16:47
 tofu-sensei Friend Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 112 Rept. Given: 1 Rept. Rcvd 14 Times in 8 Posts Thanks Given: 1 Thanks Rcvd at 22 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by contextrax Lets say four weeks but I think I was lucky this time only needed 2^50 iterations. (or lets say extremely lucky) ECDLP is based on the birthday paradox so you never know exactly the among of work. 2^52 iterations would required 4 times more work.
I'd say Armadillo is still secure enough then. Who's paying the electricity bill for your little experiment?
#9
08-18-2017, 17:57
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tofu-sensei I'd say Armadillo is still secure enough then. Who's paying the electricity bill for your little experiment?
My total speed of 600mill/sec was spred over ~20 different computers including friends and family.
The power consummation on todays cpu is not that bad. My laptop Core i7 has a max TDP of 15w.

Lets play with some numbers.
My fastest PC did 46mill/sec. (a Core i7-6700 @ 3.4GHz)
Say we as a group can collect 90 of them
That should give a speed of ~2^32 / sec
After 12 days we would reach 2^52 iterations.
If we are as lucky as I and solve after 2^50 iterations then this would take only ~3 days

Some other attacked this curve before I did and implemented it on FPGS's
https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/368.pdf

If I where to release a product today then I would not rely on a 113 bit's koblitz curve. Using a different 113 bits curve would be a bit better and perhaps out of reach for reversers today but new cpu's are hitting the market as we speak and the new inlet with 18 cores and amd with 16 corse will probably be speed monsters.
Would also be fun to try implementing this on GPU.
I know they did some research on this when attacking ecc2k-131.
#10
08-18-2017, 18:10
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by mr.exodia Very interesting! I could integrate this in my Armadillo Key Tool (https://github.com/mrexodia/akt)...
Damn your tool roxx. I spend countless of hrs extracting the crypto params that your tool can do with just one click
Love it.

(Hope I wont get banned for this reply)
 The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to contextrax For This Useful Post: Apuromafo (03-05-2019), mr.exodia (08-18-2017)
#11
08-18-2017, 18:52
 tofu-sensei Friend Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 112 Rept. Given: 1 Rept. Rcvd 14 Times in 8 Posts Thanks Given: 1 Thanks Rcvd at 22 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by contextrax If we are as lucky as I and solve after 2^50 iterations then this would take only ~3 days
Point taken. I ran the numbers again and the power costs s̶h̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ could be well below the cost of a license for whatever software it is you're attacking.

Last edited by tofu-sensei; 08-19-2017 at 01:54.
#12
08-18-2017, 22:23
 deepzero VIP Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Germany Posts: 298 Rept. Given: 106 Rept. Rcvd 64 Times in 42 Posts Thanks Given: 156 Thanks Rcvd at 213 Times in 93 Posts
Quote:
 Point taken. I ran the numbers again and the power costs should be well below the cost of a license for whatever software it is you're attacking.
It's not always about the monetary costs...

I think a true keygen for v9.6 would be a fitting end to the Armadillo saga.
 The Following User Gave Reputation+1 to deepzero For This Useful Post: mr.exodia (08-18-2017)
 The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to deepzero For This Useful Post: HooK (02-28-2018), SKiLLa (09-26-2017), tonyweb (08-26-2017)
#13
08-18-2017, 22:38
 cachito Friend Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: argentina Posts: 59 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 12 Times in 8 Posts Thanks Given: 163 Thanks Rcvd at 85 Times in 47 Posts
When hashing GPU is 100x over CPU, +/- depending of the kind of hash.
I can test in a 3 GPU computer if someone programs that option.
Good luck with this experiment, it is really interesting
#14
08-19-2017, 00:16
 contextrax Friend Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 43 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 17 Times in 7 Posts Thanks Given: 4 Thanks Rcvd at 72 Times in 19 Posts
I can't find the latest armadillo version so if anyone can share that would be great.
#15
08-19-2017, 00:27
 Kerlingen VIP Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 321 Rept. Given: 0 Rept. Rcvd 276 Times in 98 Posts Thanks Given: 0 Thanks Rcvd at 301 Times in 94 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by contextrax The power consummation on todays cpu is not that bad.
You're talking about 90 CPUs. Keygenning a single software (if you own that amount of hardware) will cost you like 1000+ US-\$ for energy alone, if you have to rent cloud computing you will be at 5000+ US-\$.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is Off HTML code is Off Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Mynotos General Discussion 3 11-22-2019 00:49

All times are GMT +8. The time now is 22:54.

 Aaron's homepage - Top

Always Your Best Friend: Aaron, JMI, ahmadmansoor, ZeNiX, chessgod101
( 1998 - 2022 )