Ir para o conteúdo principal

Escrever uma avaliação PREreview

SM in the Wild: Measuring Security-Semantics Failures in Chinese Commercial Cryptography Implementations

Publicado
Servidor
Zenodo
DOI
10.5281/zenodo.23716987

Chinese commercial cryptography (Guomi: SM2, SM3, SM4) exposes security inputs international APIs and misuse taxonomies omit: the signer's identity, the curve and the ciphertext arrangement. We call this gap *contract impedance mismatch* and measure its consequences in published software, not deployments. We build an executable SM2/SM3/SM4 oracle calibrated against four GB/T standards and two Bouncy Castle defects. Across 794 npm packages, 83 Maven artifacts and 59 Gitee repositories we find 147 adjudicated rows, 144 admitted package-frame pairs; recorded replay supports 140 (14 caveated; §5). Confirmation is single-author and LLM-assisted, not independent human validation. One recorded finding grouping contributes 54 of 124 npm defect rows. It is no verified lineage: recorded, code-matched and construct-based memberships differ. By finding key: 64 keys, 27 at L5; that grouping is one key. Conversion is **56.6%** on npm (124 of 219 candidates); removing grouping numerator rows gives 32.0% (a counting scenario, not remeasurement; §6.1). A JCA SM4 provider replaces caller-supplied IVs with a constant in four modes; a key agreement returns a constant SM4 key. Every demonstrated confidentiality break is a generic defect of this kind - known key, fixed IV, non-cryptographic randomness; the Guomi-specific categories yield conformance defects and permitted-but-weak defaults. Four detector families find 7 of a curated 28-finding cohort, all via hard-coded keys; none flags any Guomi-specific property. On 88 seeded defects our literal screen localises 37.5%, Semgrep's semantic screen 6.8%; neither localises the 12 provider-contract defects. Constant screens find implementations, not uses; a frame's membership rate must precede its precision. Prepared for submission to USENIX Security 2027 (Cycle 2). Artefacts whose findings are not already public are pseudonymized (U1-U59) per the paper's Ethical Considerations section.

Você pode escrever uma avaliação PREreview de SM in the Wild: Measuring Security-Semantics Failures in Chinese Commercial Cryptography Implementations. Uma avaliação PREreview é uma avaliação de um preprint e pode variar de algumas frases a um parecer extenso, semelhante a um parecer de revisão por pares realizado por periódicos.

Antes de começar

We will ask you to log in with your ORCID iD. If you don’t have an iD, you can create one.

What is an ORCID iD?

An ORCID iD is a unique identifier that distinguishes you from everyone with the same or similar name.

Começar agora