Election-Tech-Initiative / Election-Tech-Initiative/electionguard-python

🐞 Incorrect generation of nonces for encryption of ballot selections

未關閉
#655 1 則留言 0 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視
enhancement
主要語言
Python
星號
168
分支
103
PR 合併指標
30 天內沒有已合併 PR

描述

### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current Behavior

`encrypt_selection` does this:
```python
selection_description_hash = selection_description.crypto_hash()
nonce_sequence = Nonces(selection_description_hash, nonce_seed)
selection_nonce = nonce_sequence[selection_description.sequence_order]
disjunctive_chaum_pedersen_nonce = next(iter(nonce_sequence))
```
The `nonce_seed` value comes from a parameter to the function.

The ElectionGuard spec says: "For each option listed in the election manifest file [where an "option" here refers to a contest selection], the nonce used to encrypt that option is derived from the contest nonce ($R_C$) and the selection label for that option ($L_S) as $R = H(L_S, R_C)$."

So, the code that derives `nonce_sequence` is fine. But the next two lines are not compliant with the spec, because the whole `sequence_order` part is (or should be) subsumed in the `selection_description_hash`.

Instead, the last two lines should read something more like:
```python
selection_nonce, disjunctive_chaum_pedersen_nonce = nonce_sequence[0:1]
```

This distinction is important for anybody trying to implement the spec correctly. It would be helpful if the spec were more clear on nonce sequences. Right now it's relatively silent on this.

### Expected Behavior

_No response_

### Steps To Reproduce

_No response_

### Environment

_No response_

### Anything else?

_No response_

貢獻指南

開啟貢獻指南

評估

這個 Issue 還沒有評估資料。

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。