Hello,
This is a question for integrators and packagers of Mbed TLS, especially
if you're integrating the library in some embedded OS or BSP.
To build, configure and test Mbed TLS, we use Python for several purposes:
* To configure the library with scripts/config.py, unless you use the
default configuration or write your own configuration from scratch.
* To generate some configuration-independent library source files, but
only if you use the development branch, not if you use a release or
an LTS branch.
* To generate some glue code for PSA drivers, if you use PSA drivers
and don't write the glue code by hand.
* To generate the unit test source files.
* (We have many more maintenance and test scripts but they're out of
scope here.)
(Python is not necessary, and will remain unnecessary, to configure and
build the library with a given set of hardware drivers, so that a
typical BSP will not have to depend on Python.)
For each of these purposes, how problematic is it if we require a recent
version of Python? We're currently planning to drop support for older
versions of Python as soon as they become unsupported upstream (so
officially dropping 3.8 now — although right now all scripts still work
on 3.5). This includes versions of Python that are still shipped in e.g.
Linux distributions that are themselves officially supported. Is there
demand for supporting older Python versions for some scripts?
Also, how problematic is it if some of these purposes require
third-party Python packages?
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
FYI to all TF dev teams leveraging Open CI.
Best regards,
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Glen Valante via Tf-openci-triage <
tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 at 08:41
Subject: [Tf-openci-triage] FYI; Cambridge Lab Down
To: tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <
tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Hello All;
FYI; the Cambridge lab took a serious power hit and is down. They are
scrambling to get things back up, but it may take all weekend.
Expect LAVA failures and other strange results.
Thanks;
-g
--
[image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org>
Glen Valante | *Director Program & Project Management*
T: +1.508.517.3461 <1617-320-5000>
glen.valante(a)linaro.org | Skype: gvalante <callto:gvalante>
--
Tf-openci-triage mailing list -- tf-openci-triage(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
tf-openci-triage-leave(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Dear sir/madam,
Hope you are doing good!
We are working on a lightweight TLS implementation for embedded hardware
and want to add our own algorithm inside mbedTLS. As per my knowledge, we
have to add a .h file in mbedtls/include/mbedtls and .c file in the
library. Also, we have to list our algorithm in library/CMakeLists.txt.
Except these, what should be the procedure?
Also, our task is during handshake, the receiver chooses our algorithm
instead of the default one for encryption and decryption. If someone could
help us regarding this then it would be great.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
--
*Dr. Vishal J. Rathod*
*(Member - IEEE, ACM, IET)*
*Senior Project Engineer (SPE),*
*IoT R & D Group,*
*C-DAC, Electronic City,*
*Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.*
*Email ID: rathodvishal78(a)gmail.com <rathodvishal78(a)gmail.com> and *
vishalrathod(a)ieee.org
*Mobile - 9879957770*
Hi!
I am a new MbedTLS user and would like to say thanks to devs first!
From my point of view mbedtls_net_connect() could handle binding socket to a specified local client port.
Although it does not seem to be a common requirement and bloats API a little bit but otherwise user has to throw away mbedtls_net_connect()
and implement connection function by their hands.
Best,
Alex
Hi Ruchika,
as an addition to the previous answers, there is also the SecureMark-TLS benchmark from EEMBC that "Analyzes the costs associated with implementing TLS on an edge device using a common IoT cyphersuite comprised of ECC & ECDSA on the NIST secp256r1 curve, SHA256, and AES128-CCM/ECB", see: https://www.eembc.org/securemark/
It provides profiles to run benchmarks against Mbed TLS API, PSA Crypto API, and wolfSSL, see sources here: https://github.com/eembc/securemark-tls/tree/main/examples/selfhosted/profi…
The chosen cipher-suite is similar to the TF-M medium profile and it allows estimates of speed and power consumption for TLS on microcontrollers. It also allows to add - manually - footprint data.
Best
Stephan
From: Ruchika Gupta via psa-crypto <psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta_1(a)nxp.com>
Date: Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 13:40
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>, "psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [psa-crypto] Benchmark application for PSA crypto API's
Hi,
For mbedtls API’s, there is a benchmark application available. Are there any plans to implement benchmark application for PSA crypto APIs ?
Regards,
Ruchika
Hi,
For mbedtls API's, there is a benchmark application available. Are there any plans to implement benchmark application for PSA crypto APIs ?
Regards,
Ruchika
Hello,
In mbedLS v3.4.0, I came across a build error that there are no members for type and flag in psa_core_keyattributes_t structure.
The following functions in psa_crypto_core.h access private members type and flag of psa_core_keyattributes_t structure without the MBEDTLS_PRIBATE() private access.
* psa_is_key_slot_occupied()
* psa_key_slot_get_flags()
* psa_key_slot_set_flags()
* psa_key_slot_set_bits_in_flags()
* psa_key_slot_clear_bits()
Updating to private access for attribute struct members in psa_crypto_core.h fixed the build errors.
Regards,
Archanaa
Hi All,
A gentle reminder that the US-Europe timezone-friendly MBed TLS Tech forum
is next Monday at 4:30 PM UK time. Invite details can be found on the
online calendar here <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you have any topics, please let Dave Rodgman know. :)
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org