Skip to main content

Identification of Bugs and Vulnerabilities in TLS Implementation for Windows Operating System Using State Machine Learning

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Security in Computing and Communications (SSCC 2018)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 969))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

TLS protocol is an essential part of secure Internet communication. In the past, many attacks have been identified on the protocol. Most of these attacks are not due to design flaws of the protocol, but due to flaws in specific implementation of protocol. One of the widely used implementation of TLS is SChannel which is used in Windows operating system since its inception. In this paper, we have used “protocol state fuzzing” to identify vulnerable and undesired state transitions in the state machine models of the protocol for various versions of SChannel. The technique of protocol state fuzzing has been implemented using query based state machine learning. The client as well as server components have been analyzed thoroughly using this technique and various flaws have been discovered in the implementation. Exploitation of these flaws under specific circumstances may lead to serious attacks which have potential to disrupt secure communication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Aviram, N., et al.: DROWN: breaking TLS using SSLv2. In: USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 689–706 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Green, M.: Attack of the week: FREAK (or ‘factoring the NSA for fun and profit’). A Few Thoughts on Cryptographic Engineering (2018). https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2015/03/03/attack-of-week-freak-or-factoring-nsa/

  3. Adrian, D., et al.: Imperfect forward secrecy: how Diffie-Hellman fails in practice. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 5–17. ACM (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bhargavan, K., Leurent, G.: Transcript collision attacks: breaking authentication in TLS, IKE, and SSH. In: Network and Distributed System Security Symposium-NDSS 2016 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Synopsys, S.: Heartbleed Bug. Heartbleed.com (2018). http://heartbleed.com/

  6. De Ruiter, J., Poll, E.: Protocol state fuzzing of TLS implementations. In: USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 193–206 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Www-archive.mozilla.org: The SSL 2.0 Protocol (1995). https://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/ssl/draft02.html

  8. Tools.ietf.org: RFC 6101 - The Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) Protocol Version 3.0 (2011). https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6101

  9. Ietf.org: RFC 2246 - The TLS Protocol Version 1.0 (1999). https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2246.txt

  10. Ietf.org: RFC 4346 - The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.1 (2006). https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4346.txt

  11. Ietf.org: RFC 5246 - The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2 (2008). https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5246.txt

  12. Beurdouche, B., et al.: A messy state of the union: taming the composite state machines of TLS. In: 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pp. 535–552. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Msdn.microsoft.com: Secure Channel (Windows) (n.d.). https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa380123(v=vs.85).aspx

  14. Yadav, T., Rao, A.M.: Technical aspects of cyber kill chain. In: Abawajy, J.H., Mukherjea, S., Thampi, S.M., Ruiz-Martínez, A. (eds.) SSCC 2015. CCIS, vol. 536, pp. 438–452. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22915-7_40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Koustav, S., Mallari, R.A., Yadav, T.: Cyber attack thread: a control-flow based approach to deconstruct and mitigate cyber threats. In: 2015 International Conference on Computing and Network Communications (CoCoNet), pp. 170–178. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Langley, A.: ImperialViolet - early changecipherspec attack. Imperialviolet.org (2014). https://www.imperialviolet.org/2014/06/05/earlyccs.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tarun Yadav .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Yadav, T., Sadhukhan, K. (2019). Identification of Bugs and Vulnerabilities in TLS Implementation for Windows Operating System Using State Machine Learning. In: Thampi, S., Madria, S., Wang, G., Rawat, D., Alcaraz Calero, J. (eds) Security in Computing and Communications. SSCC 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 969. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5826-5_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5826-5_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5825-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5826-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics