fips205-slhdsa-verified/TRUSTED-BASE.md
mrwulf 476f669f5c bridge: re-pin to the NIST-ACVP source commit; state the real coverage numbers
The companion fips205-source commit adds NIST ACVP SHA2-128s verification
vectors and a real differential bridge. This repo re-pins to it and replaces the
word "finite" with numbers, per external review rounds 4-6.

- extract.sh + PROVENANCE re-pinned 797b4ef -> 3153988. The provenance guard
  did its job first: it REFUSED the moved source until the pin was rotated
  deliberately.
- VERIFIED that the test/vector commit does not perturb the proved model: after
  re-extraction all four pinned model files are byte-identical
  (Types db720b4a…, Funs 7b7de55f…, TypesExternal 37958beb…, FunsExternal
  5efe551c…), check.sh is ALL GREEN, and the audit digest is unchanged
  (d83e297a…). The only regenerated difference is the untracked Aeneas
  *_Template.lean byproduct, which Phase 0 purges.
- TRUSTED-BASE item 9 and the README now state the bridge's actual size:
  131 assertion points (was 9), of which 20 are NIST ACVP SHA2-128s
  known-answer tests run against the proved path — 10 from the `internal`
  group (whose message IS M', exactly what slh_verify_128s consumes) and 10
  from `external pure` where mono, the deployed verifier and NIST must all
  agree, 9 of those with a NON-EMPTY context, which is the first empirical
  check of the domain-separator byte and context prefix that item 10 declares
  outside every proof. Both documents keep saying plainly that a passing
  differential test is evidence, not a proof.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-28 09:46:29 +02:00

112 lines
7.5 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

# TRUSTED-BASE — what the certificates do NOT cover
Eleven certificates over the extracted `verify_mono` model are now proven
(`verification/check.sh` green; the apex is
`fips205.slh_verify_128s_accepts_iff`). This file states what those
certificates deliberately do NOT establish; it is maintained as the campaign
proceeds and is part of every claim.
1. **The five verify-path hash oracles.** `h_msg, f, h, t_l, t_len`
(SLH-DSA-SHA2-128s instantiations over SHA-256; `prf`/`prf_msg` are
sign-side only and do not appear in the cone) are modeled as opaque
functions with assumed functional behavior. Their correctness against
FIPS 180-4 is NOT proven here — the same standing boundary as SHA-512
in the ed25519 apex. A collision or misimplementation inside the hash
layer is invisible to these certificates.
2. **Signing and key generation.** Out of extraction scope entirely. A
verified verify path says nothing about the safety of signature or key
production (including randomness).
3. **The transpilation pair.** Charon and Aeneas (pinned versions in the
toolchain) are trusted to preserve semantics from Rust (MIR) to the
Lean model. Divergence between rustc's semantics and the extracted
model is trusted base.
4. **The Lean kernel and its three axioms**
(`propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound`).
5. **Build correspondence.** No reproducible-builds claim: the proof is
about the pinned source, not about any particular compiled binary
(the estate's R5 gap, stated everywhere it matters).
6. **Parameter-set scope.** Claims will bind SLH-DSA-SHA2-128s only;
other parameter sets are unverified until separately extracted and
proven (R2).
7. **Aeneas-compat + de-plumbing patch surface.** The fn-pointer-to-named-
oracle rewrite in `fips205-source` (phase 1) and the two de-plumbing
rounds (index-loop rewrites of the iterator adapters on the verify path,
de-plumbing round 2 at `bea1051`; current snapshot head `797b4ef`) are
part of the verified surface: the
certificates cover the *patched* verify path, and the patch commits are
the auditable delta from upstream `30bac08`. Each rewrite's equivalence
to upstream is argued in its commit and checked, for SHA2-128s, by the
snapshot differential test — it is not itself machine-checked.
8. **The `base_2b` inner loop.** `helpers.base_2b_loop0_loop0` (which
determines the FORS indices and WOTS digits) is threaded opaquely and
has no certificate; a defect there could change the recomputed root while
all eleven theorems still hold.
9. **The deployed generic verifier.** The proved subject is the private
`verify_mono` facade. The bridge to upstream's generic `pk.verify()` is a
finite differential test, **not** a machine-checked refinement — no theorem
here says the two agree; the evidence is empirical and its size is stated so
a reader can judge it (external review, rounds 46, correctly objected that
"finite" without a number is not a disclosure):
- **131 assertion points** (was 9 until 2026-07-28: three rounds from one
fixed seed, corrupting one fixed byte of a 7856-byte signature);
- of those, **20 are NIST ACVP SHA2-128s known-answer tests run against the
proved path** — 10 from the `internal` group, whose message *is* M and so
is exactly what `slh_verify_128s` consumes, and 10 from the `external pure`
group where mono, the deployed verifier and NIST must all three agree.
NIST's negatives cover structurally distinct corruption sites (modified R,
SIGFORS, SIGHT, modified message) rather than one arbitrary byte;
- the remaining 108 are randomized: 12 rounds, varying message lengths
including empty, corruption spread across the whole signature, plus
wrong-public-key and wrong-context cases.
Still **not** covered by any of it: agreement on inputs nobody generated, and
the prehash variant against the mono path (see item 10). A passing
differential test is evidence, not a proof.
10. **Everything above the extraction root.** The root is
`verify_mono::slh_verify_128s = slh_verify_internal_free(M, sig, pk)`,
which takes the message-digest input **M as an argument**. The code in
`slh_verify`/`verify` (`src/lib.rs`) that runs *before* this root is NOT
covered by any certificate: the assembly of M; the pure-vs-prehash
**domain-separator byte** (`0u8` for `verify` vs `1u8` for `hash_verify`
— the whole cross-variant domain separation); the FIPS-205 `ctx.len() >
255` bound; and signature/public-key deserialization. The certificates
say nothing about this input handling — a defect there (e.g. a wrong
separator byte) would be outside every proof.
**Concretely, so the consequence is not left to the reader:** that byte is
the *only* thing separating the pure and prehash variants. If it were wrong
or dropped, a signature issued over the pure M would verify as a prehash
signature and vice versa — cross-variant signature confusion, a forgery
primitive. No certificate in this repository would change.
11. **The verification harness itself.** The certificates are statements
checked by the Lean kernel, but the *button* that reports them is a shell
script. Round-5 review demonstrated that stubbing `verification/lean-guard`
alone — one repo-tracked file, without touching `check.sh`, the manifest, or
the proofs — yields ALL GREEN in 3.6 seconds over deliberately destroyed
proofs. `lean-guard` is therefore **sha256-pinned** by check.sh Phase 0
(`PROVENANCE.json → harness_integrity_sha256`); it is kept rather than
removed because it is the memory cap and machine-wide lock that protect the
build machine (a Lean elaboration once reached 12.2 GB and took the host
down).
**`verification/Proofs/Audit.lean` is pinned the same way, and for a sharper
reason** (round-6 NEW-7): the digest it emits binds the audit's *data* — the
policy constants, the statements, the specification bodies — but nothing can
make a program hash the correctness of its own logic. Flipping this file's
two fail-closed guards to `unless true` disabled every in-Lean check while
the digest stayed BYTE-IDENTICAL, and a repository proving `False` passed
ALL GREEN. The byte pin converts that from a silent green into a build
failure; a legitimate change to the audit is now a reviewable pin rotation.
Note the residue honestly: an author who edits the logic *and* rotates its
pin in the same commit is not stopped by anything mechanical — that case is
caught only by reading the diff at the pin.
Still trusted, and NOT bound by anything the button can check:
`check.sh` itself, `~/aeneas-toolchain/env.sh`, the `$AENEAS_HOME` tree
(i.e. *which* Aeneas/Lean library the proofs are checked against), `python3`,
and the Lean toolchain. An audit executed by a harness cannot defend against
an author who edits that harness; the consumer defense is the pinned commit,
reviewed at the pin.
12. **Composition.** The apex does **not** compose the ten loop-fidelity
theorems — it is a structural factorization of the extracted verifier around
its final equality check and references none of them (it would remain
provable if one were deleted). The ten are independent, individually
human-reviewed lemmas. Round-5 review makes this worth stating here rather
than only in the README: each of the ten is individually meaningful only to
the extent a human has read its reference fold against FIPS 205.