RSA private key calculate [MADLIB] - encryption

How can I calculate the private key(d)?
The problem is that d(private key) has to be an int number but I keep getting d=0.0000152585.. Help please?
p=92092076805892533739724722602668675840671093008520241548191914215399824020372076186460768206814914423802230398410980218741906960527104568970225804374404612617736579286959865287226538692911376507934256844456333236362669879347073756238894784951597211105734179388300051579994253565459304743059533646753003894559
q=97846775312392801037224396977012615848433199640105786119757047098757998273009741128821931277074555731813289423891389911801250326299324018557072727051765547115514791337578758859803890173153277252326496062476389498019821358465433398338364421624871010292162533041884897182597065662521825095949253625730631876637
e=65537
n=9010912747277787249738727439840427055736519196538871349093408340706668231808840540195374015916168031416186859836416053338250477003776576736854137538279810042409758765948034443613881324504120707334213544491046703922409406729564516371394804946909037646047891880347940067132730874804943893719672960932378043325067514786209219718314429979032869544980643978919561908707109629612202311323626173343456843249212057093980583352634168733656443959925428846968193413110401346035535595817965624054783296380268863401241570313602685481219583686719199499297832165308522137209299081956650614940546284136240753995440003473611843518083
ϕ(n)=9010912747277787249738727439840427055736519196538871349093408340706668231808840540195374015916168031416186859836416053338250477003776576736854137538279810042409758765948034443613881324504120707334213544491046703922409406729564516371394804946909037646047891880347940067132730874804943893719672960932378043324975422709403327184574705256430200869139972885911041667158917715396802487303254097156996075042397142670178352954223188514914536999398324277997967608735996733417799016531005758767556757687357486893307313469146352244856913807372125743058937380356924926103564902568350563360552030570781449252380469826858839623524
So with the formula:
d=e-1 mod ϕ(n)
I keep getting 0.0000152585. Any ideas?

You need to use the Modular Multiplicative Inverse, not the inverse.
Here is an example in python using the cryptography module.
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric.rsa import _modinv
p=92092076805892533739724722602668675840671093008520241548191914215399824020372076186460768206814914423802230398410980218741906960527104568970225804374404612617736579286959865287226538692911376507934256844456333236362669879347073756238894784951597211105734179388300051579994253565459304743059533646753003894559
q=97846775312392801037224396977012615848433199640105786119757047098757998273009741128821931277074555731813289423891389911801250326299324018557072727051765547115514791337578758859803890173153277252326496062476389498019821358465433398338364421624871010292162533041884897182597065662521825095949253625730631876637
e=65537
phi = (p-1) * (q-1)
d = _modinv(e, phi)
print(d) # 1405046269503207469140791548403639533127416416214210694972085079171787580463776820425965898174272870486015739516125786182821637006600742140682552321645503743280670839819078749092730110549881891271317396450158021688253989767145578723458252769465545504142139663476747479225923933192421405464414574786272963741656223941750084051228611576708609346787101088759062724389874160693008783334605903142528824559223515203978707969795087506678894006628296743079886244349469131831225757926844843554897638786146036869572653204735650843186722732736888918789379054050122205253165705085538743651258400390580971043144644984654914856729
print((e * d) % phi) # 1
You can find the implementation of _modinv() here.

By fips.186-4 standard, you have to use λ not φ in RSA;
λ(n)=lcm(p−1,q−1)
to calculate d= e-1 mod λ(n) you must use extendedGCD algorithm.
find x and y that satisfify Bezout Identity
e x + λ(n) y = gcd(e,λ(n))
e x -1 = (-y)λ(n)
take mod λ(n)
e x ≡ 1 mod λ(n)

Related

Implementation of Pohlig-Hellman unable to solve for large exponents

I'm trying to create an implementation of the Pohlig-Hellman algorithm in order to create a utility to craft / exploit backdoors in implementations of the Diffie-Hellman protocol. This project is inspired by this 2016 white-paper by NCC Group.
I currently have an implementation, here, that works for relatively small exponents – i.e. Given a linear congruence, g^x = h (mod n), for some specially-crafted modulus, n = pq, where p and q are prime, my implementation can solve for values of x smaller than min{ p, q }.
However, if x is larger than the smallest prime factor of n, then my implementation will give an incorrect solution. I suspect that the issue may not be with my implementation of Pohlig-Hellman, itself, but with the arguments I am passing to it. All the code can be found at the link, provided above, but I'll copy the relevant code snippets, here:
#
# Implementation of Pohlig-Hellman algorithm
#
# The `crt` function implements the Chinese Remainder Theorem, and the `pollard` function implements
# Pollard's Rho algorithm for discrete logarithms (see /dph/crt.py and /dph/pollard.py).
#
def pohlig(G, H, P, factors):
g = [pow(G, divexact(P - 1, f), P) for f in factors]
h = [pow(H, divexact(P - 1, f), P) for f in factors]
if Config.verbose:
x = []
total = len(factors)
for i, (gi, hi) in enumerate(zip(g, h), start=1):
print('Solving discrete logarithm {}/{}...'.format(str(i).rjust(len(str(total))), total))
result = pollard(gi, hi, P)
x.append(result)
print(f'x = 0x{result.digits(16)}')
else:
x = [pollard(gi, hi, P) for gi, hi in zip(g, h)]
return crt(x, factors)
Above is my implementation of Pohlig-Hellman, and below is where I call it to exploit a backdoor in some implementation of the Diffie-Hellman protocol.
def _exp(args):
g = args.g
h = args.h
p_factors = list(map(mpz, args.p_factors.split(',')))
try:
p_factors.remove(2)
except ValueError:
pass
q_factors = list(map(mpz, args.q_factors.split(',')))
try:
q_factors.remove(2)
except ValueError:
pass
p = 2 * _product(*p_factors) + 1
q = 2 * _product(*q_factors) + 1
if Config.verbose:
print(f'p = 0x{p.digits(16)}')
print(f'q = 0x{q.digits(16)}')
print()
print(f'Compute the discrete logarithm modulo `p`')
print(f'-----------------------------------------')
px = pohlig(g % p, h % p, p, p_factors)
if Config.verbose:
print()
print(f'Compute the discrete logarithm modulo `q`')
print(f'-----------------------------------------')
qx = pohlig(g % q, h % q, q, q_factors)
if Config.verbose:
print()
x = crt([px, qx], [p, q])
print(f'x = 0x{x.digits(16)}')
Here is a summary of what I am doing:
Choose a prime p = 2 * prod{ p_i } + 1, where p_i denotes a set of primes.
Choose a prime q = 2 * prod{ q_j } + 1, where q_j denotes a set of primes.
Inject n = pq as the backdoor modulus in some implementation of Diffie-Hellman.
Wait for a victim (e.g. Alice computes A = g^a (mod n), and Bob computes B = g^b (mod n)).
Solve for Alice's or Bob's secret exponent, a or b, and compute their shared secret key, K = A^b = B^a (mod n).
Step #5 is done by performing the Pohlig-Hellman algorithm twice to solve for x (mod p) and x (mod q), and then the Chinese Remainder Theorem is used to solve for x (mod n).
EDIT
The x that I am referring to in the description of step #5 is either Alice's secret exponent, a, or Bob's secret exponent, b, depending on which we choose to solve for, since only one is needed to compute the shared secret key, K.

Is O(n^(1/logn)) actually constant?

I came across this time complexity function and according to me, it is actually constant. Please correct me if I am wrong.
n^(1/logn) => (2^m)^(1/log(2^m)) => (2^m)^(1/m) => 2
Since any n can be written as a power of 2, I can do the above simplification and prove that it is constant, right?
Assuming log is the natural log, then this is equivalent to e, not 2, but either way it's a constant.
First, let:
k = n^(1 / log n)
Then take the log of both sides:
log k = (1 / log n) * log n
So:
log k = 1
Now raise both sides to the power of e to get:
e^(log k) = e^(1)
And thus:
k = e.
Here's an alternative proof:
1 / (log n) = (log e) / (log n) = logn e by the change of base identity.
Then, nlogn e = e by the definition of the logarithm as the inverse of exponentiation.

How to calculate x^y mod z? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Calculating (a^b)%MOD
(7 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I am wondering how to calculate x^y mod z. x and y are very large (can't fit in 64 bit integer) and z will fit 64 bit integer.
And one thing don't give answers like x^y mod z is same as (x mod z)^y mod z.
Here is the standard method, in pseudo-code:
function powerMod(b, e, m)
x := 1
while e > 0
if e % 2 == 1
x := (b * x) % m
e := e - 1
else
b := (b * b) % m
e := e / 2
return x
The algorithm is known as exponentiation by squaring or the square and multiply method.
If you are using Java, then turn x, y, and z into BigInteger.
BigInteger xBI = new BigInteger(x);
BigInteger yBI = new BigInteger(y);
BigInteger zBI = new BigInteger(z);
BigInteger answer = xBI.modPow(yBI,zBI);

O notation: 2^log(O(n^2)) = 2^O(log(n^2))?

I tried to solve this with logarithm rules:
O(n^2) = 2^O(log(n^2))
c*n^2 = 2^log(n^2c)
Im not sure that is true?
No, no, no. You can't just take logarithms.
2^log (O (n^2)) = 2 ^ log (c * n^2)) = c * n^2
2^ O (log n^2) = 2^ (c * log n^2) = (2 ^ (log n^2)) ^ c = (n^2) ^ c.
The first is just O (n^2). The second one is n raised to sum unknown but limited power.
I think this depends on what the equals sign means here. If the equals sign means
"Any function that is of 2log O(n2) is also 2O(log n2)"
Then the claim is true. Let f(n) be some function that's O(n2). This means that there's a c and n0 such that for any n ≥ n0, we know that f(n) ≤ cn2. Therefore, for any n ≥ n0, we know that
2log f(n) ≤ 2log (cn2) = 2(log c + log n2)
The function log c + log n2 is itself O(log n2), so we see that
2log f(n) ≤ 2(log c + log n2) = 2O(log n2)
On the other hand, if the equals sign means
"The class of functions that is 2log O(n2) is the same class of functions that is 2O(log n2)"
then the claim is false. For example, the function n4 is in the second class because it can be written as 22 log n2, but it's not in the first class.
Hope this helps!

How to implement c=m^e mod n for enormous numbers?

I'm trying to figure out how to implement RSA crypto from scratch (just for the intellectual exercise), and i'm stuck on this point:
For encryption, c = me mod n
Now, e is normally 65537. m and n are 1024-bit integers (eg 128-byte arrays). This is obviously too big for standard methods. How would you implement this?
I've been reading a bit about exponentiation here but it just isn't clicking for me:
Wikipedia-Exponentiation by squaring
This Chapter (see section 14.85)
Thanks.
edit: Also found this - is this more what i should be looking at? Wikipedia- Modular Exponentiation
Exponentiation by squaring:
Let's take an example. You want to find 1723. Note that 23 is 10111 in binary. Let's try to build it up from left to right.
// a exponent in binary
a = 17 //17^1 1
a = a * a //17^2 10
a = a * a //17^4 100
a = a * 17 //17^5 101
a = a * a //17^10 1010
a = a * 17 //17^11 1011
a = a * a //17^22 10110
a = a * 17 //17^23 10111
When you square, you double the exponent (shift left by 1 bit). When you multiply by m, you add 1 to the exponent.
If you want to reduce modulo n, you can do it after each multiplication (rather than leaving it to the end, which would make the numbers get very large).
65537 is 10000000000000001 in binary which makes all of this pretty easy. It's basically
a = m
repeat 16 times:
a = a * a
a = a mod n
a = a * m
a = a mod n
where of course a, n and m are "big integers". a needs to be at least 2048 bits as it can get as large as (n-1)2.
For an efficient algorithm you need to combine the exponentiation by squaring with repeated application of mod after each step.
For odd e this holds:
me mod n = m ⋅ me-1 mod n
For even e:
me mod n = (me/2 mod n)2 mod n
With m1 = m as a base case this defines a recursive way to do efficient modular exponentiation.
But even with an algorithm like this, because m and n will be very large, you will still need to use a type/library that can handle integers of such sizes.
result = 1
while e>0:
if (e & 1) != 0:
result = result * m
result = result mod n
m = m*m
m = m mod n
e = e>>1
return result
This checks bits in the exponent starting with the least significant bit. Each time we move up a bit it corresponds to doubling the power of m - hence we shift e and square m. The result only gets the power of m multiplied in if the exponent has a 1 bit in that position. All multiplications need to be reduced mod n.
As an example, consider m^13. 11 = 1101 in binary. so this is the same as m^8 * m^4 * m. Notice the powers 8,4,(not 2),1 which is the same as the bits 1101. And then recall that m^8 = (m^4)^2 and m^4 = (m^2)^2.
If g(x) = x mod 2^k is faster to calculate for your bignum library than f(x) = x mod N for N not divisible by 2, then consider using Montgomery multiplication. When used with modular exponentiation, it avoids having to calculate modulo N at each step, you just need to do the "Montgomeryization" / "un-Montgomeryization" at the beginning and end.

Resources