65 KiB
type | weight |
---|---|
module | 100 |
End-to-End Encryption
Matrix optionally supports end-to-end encryption, allowing rooms to be created whose conversation contents are not decryptable or interceptable on any of the participating homeservers.
Key Distribution
Encryption and Authentication in Matrix is based around public-key cryptography. The Matrix protocol provides a basic mechanism for exchange of public keys, though an out-of-band channel is required to exchange fingerprints between users to build a web of trust.
Overview
- Bob publishes the public keys and supported algorithms for his device. This may include long-term identity keys, and/or one-time keys.
+----------+ +--------------+
| Bob's HS | | Bob's Device |
+----------+ +--------------+
| |
|<=============|
/keys/upload
- Alice requests Bob's public identity keys and supported algorithms.
+----------------+ +------------+ +----------+
| Alice's Device | | Alice's HS | | Bob's HS |
+----------------+ +------------+ +----------+
| | |
|=================>|==============>|
/keys/query <federation>
- Alice selects an algorithm and claims any one-time keys needed.
+----------------+ +------------+ +----------+
| Alice's Device | | Alice's HS | | Bob's HS |
+----------------+ +------------+ +----------+
| | |
|=================>|==============>|
/keys/claim <federation>
Key algorithms
The name ed25519
corresponds to the
Ed25519 signature algorithm. The key is a
32-byte Ed25519 public key, encoded using unpadded Base64. Example:
"SogYyrkTldLz0BXP+GYWs0qaYacUI0RleEqNT8J3riQ"
The name curve25519
corresponds to the
Curve25519 ECDH algorithm. The key is a
32-byte Curve25519 public key, encoded using unpadded Base64.
Example:
"JGLn/yafz74HB2AbPLYJWIVGnKAtqECOBf11yyXac2Y"
The name signed_curve25519
also corresponds to the Curve25519
algorithm, but a key using this algorithm is represented by an object
with the following properties:
KeyObject
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
key |
string |
Required. The unpadded Base64-encoded 32-byte Curve25519 public key. |
signatures |
Signatures |
Required. Signatures of the key object. The signature is calculated using the process described at Signing JSON. |
Example:
{
"key":"06UzBknVHFMwgi7AVloY7ylC+xhOhEX4PkNge14Grl8",
"signatures": {
"@user:example.com": {
"ed25519:EGURVBUNJP": "YbJva03ihSj5mPk+CHMJKUKlCXCPFXjXOK6VqBnN9nA2evksQcTGn6hwQfrgRHIDDXO2le49x7jnWJHMJrJoBQ"
}
}
}
Device keys
Each device should have one Ed25519 signing key. This key should be generated on the device from a cryptographically secure source, and the private part of the key should never be exported from the device. This key is used as the fingerprint for a device by other clients.
A device will generally need to generate a number of additional keys. Details of these will vary depending on the messaging algorithm in use.
Algorithms generally require device identity keys as well as signing keys. Some algorithms also require one-time keys to improve their secrecy and deniability. These keys are used once during session establishment, and are then thrown away.
For Olm version 1, each device requires a single Curve25519 identity key, and a number of signed Curve25519 one-time keys.
Uploading keys
A device uploads the public parts of identity keys to their homeserver
as a signed JSON object, using the /keys/upload
_ API. The JSON object
must include the public part of the device's Ed25519 key, and must be
signed by that key, as described in Signing
JSON.
One-time keys are also uploaded to the homeserver using the
/keys/upload
_ API.
Devices must store the private part of each key they upload. They can discard the private part of a one-time key when they receive a message using that key. However it's possible that a one-time key given out by a homeserver will never be used, so the device that generates the key will never know that it can discard the key. Therefore a device could end up trying to store too many private keys. A device that is trying to store too many private keys may discard keys starting with the oldest.
Tracking the device list for a user
Before Alice can send an encrypted message to Bob, she needs a list of
each of his devices and the associated identity keys, so that she can
establish an encryption session with each device. This list can be
obtained by calling /keys/query
_, passing Bob's user ID in the
device_keys
parameter.
From time to time, Bob may add new devices, and Alice will need to know
this so that she can include his new devices for later encrypted
messages. A naive solution to this would be to call /keys/query
_
before sending each message -however, the number of users and devices
may be large and this would be inefficient.
It is therefore expected that each client will maintain a list of devices for a number of users (in practice, typically each user with whom we share an encrypted room). Furthermore, it is likely that this list will need to be persisted between invocations of the client application (to preserve device verification data and to alert Alice if Bob suddenly gets a new device).
Alice's client can maintain a list of Bob's devices via the following process:
- It first sets a flag to record that it is now tracking Bob's device list, and a separate flag to indicate that its list of Bob's devices is outdated. Both flags should be in storage which persists over client restarts.
- It then makes a request to
/keys/query
_, passing Bob's user ID in thedevice_keys
parameter. When the request completes, it stores the resulting list of devices in persistent storage, and clears the 'outdated' flag. - During its normal processing of responses to _, Alice's client
inspects the
changed
property of thedevice_lists
_ field. If it is tracking the device lists of any of the listed users, then it marks the device lists for those users outdated, and initiates another request to/keys/query
_ for them. - Periodically, Alice's client stores the
next_batch
field of the result from _ in persistent storage. If Alice later restarts her client, it can obtain a list of the users who have updated their device list while it was offline by calling/keys/changes
_, passing the recordednext_batch
field as thefrom
parameter. If the client is tracking the device list of any of the users listed in the response, it marks them as outdated. It combines this list with those already flagged as outdated, and initiates a/keys/query
_ request for all of them.
Warning
Bob may update one of his devices while Alice has a request to
/keys/query
in flight. Alice's client may therefore see Bob's user ID
in the device_lists
field of the /sync
response while the first
request is in flight, and initiate a second request to /keys/query
.
This may lead to either of two related problems.
The first problem is that, when the first request completes, the client will clear the 'outdated' flag for Bob's devices. If the second request fails, or the client is shut down before it completes, this could lead to Alice using an outdated list of Bob's devices.
The second possibility is that, under certain conditions, the second request may complete before the first one. When the first request completes, the client could overwrite the later results from the second request with those from the first request.
Clients MUST guard against these situations. For example, a client could
ensure that only one request to /keys/query
is in flight at a time for
each user, by queuing additional requests until the first completes.
Alternatively, the client could make a new request immediately, but
ensure that the first request's results are ignored (possibly by
cancelling the request).
Note
When Bob and Alice share a room, with Bob tracking Alice's devices, she
may leave the room and then add a new device. Bob will not be notified
of this change, as he doesn't share a room anymore with Alice. When they
start sharing a room again, Bob has an out-of-date list of Alice's
devices. In order to address this issue, Bob's homeserver will add
Alice's user ID to the changed
property of the device_lists
field,
thus Bob will update his list of Alice's devices as part of his normal
processing. Note that Bob can also be notified when he stops sharing any
room with Alice by inspecting the left
property of the device_lists
field, and as a result should remove her from its list of tracked users.
Sending encrypted attachments
When encryption is enabled in a room, files should be uploaded encrypted on the homeserver.
In order to achieve this, a client should generate a single-use 256-bit AES key, and encrypt the file using AES-CTR. The counter should be 64-bit long, starting at 0 and prefixed by a random 64-bit Initialization Vector (IV), which together form a 128-bit unique counter block.
Warning
An IV must never be used multiple times with the same key. This implies that if there are multiple files to encrypt in the same message, typically an image and its thumbnail, the files must not share both the same key and IV.
Then, the encrypted file can be uploaded to the homeserver. The key and
the IV must be included in the room event along with the resulting
mxc://
in order to allow recipients to decrypt the file. As the event
containing those will be Megolm encrypted, the server will never have
access to the decrypted file.
A hash of the ciphertext must also be included, in order to prevent the homeserver from changing the file content.
A client should send the data as an encrypted m.room.message
event,
using either m.file
as the msgtype, or the appropriate msgtype for the
file type. The key is sent using the JSON Web
Key format, with a
W3C extension.
Extensions to m.room.message
msgtypes
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
This module adds file
and thumbnail_file
properties, of type
EncryptedFile
, to m.room.message
msgtypes that reference files, such
as m.file and m.image, replacing the url
and thumbnail_url
properties.
EncryptedFile
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
url | string | Required. The URL to the file. |
key | JWK | Required. A JSON Web Key object. |
iv |
string |
Required. The 128-bit unique counter block used by AES-CTR, encoded as unpadded base64. |
hashes |
{string: string} |
Required. A map from an algorithm name to a hash of the ciphertext, encoded as unpadded base64. Clients should support the SHA-256 hash, which uses the key |
v |
string |
Required. Version of the encrypted attachments protocol. Must be |
JWK
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
kty | string | Required. Key type. Must be oct . |
key_ops |
[string] |
Required. Key operations. Must at least contain |
alg | string | Required. Algorithm. Must be A256CTR . |
k | string | Required. The key, encoded as urlsafe unpadded base64. |
ext |
boolean |
Required. Extractable. Must be |
Example:
Claiming one-time keys
A client wanting to set up a session with another device can claim a
one-time key for that device. This is done by making a request to the
/keys/claim
_ API.
A homeserver should rate-limit the number of one-time keys that a given user or remote server can claim. A homeserver should discard the public part of a one time key once it has given that key to another user.
Device verification
Before Alice sends Bob encrypted data, or trusts data received from him, she may want to verify that she is actually communicating with him, rather than a man-in-the-middle. This verification process requires an out-of-band channel: there is no way to do it within Matrix without trusting the administrators of the homeservers.
In Matrix, verification works by Alice meeting Bob in person, or
contacting him via some other trusted medium, and use [SAS
Verification](#SAS Verification) to interactively verify Bob's devices.
Alice and Bob may also read aloud their unpadded base64 encoded Ed25519
public key, as returned by /keys/query
.
Device verification may reach one of several conclusions. For example:
- Alice may "accept" the device. This means that she is satisfied that the device belongs to Bob. She can then encrypt sensitive material for that device, and knows that messages received were sent from that device.
- Alice may "reject" the device. She will do this if she knows or suspects that Bob does not control that device (or equivalently, does not trust Bob). She will not send sensitive material to that device, and cannot trust messages apparently received from it.
- Alice may choose to skip the device verification process. She is not able to verify that the device actually belongs to Bob, but has no reason to suspect otherwise. The encryption protocol continues to protect against passive eavesdroppers.
Note
Once the signing key has been verified, it is then up to the encryption protocol to verify that a given message was sent from a device holding that Ed25519 private key, or to encrypt a message so that it may only be decrypted by such a device. For the Olm protocol, this is documented at https://matrix.org/docs/olm_signing.html.
Key verification framework
Verifying keys manually by reading out the Ed25519 key is not very user-friendly, and can lead to errors. In order to help mitigate errors, and to make the process easier for users, some verification methods are supported by the specification. The methods all use a common framework for negotiating the key verification.
To use this framework, Alice's client would send
m.key.verification.request
events to Bob's devices. All of the
to_device
messages sent to Bob MUST have the same transaction_id
to
indicate they are part of the same request. This allows Bob to reject
the request on one device, and have it apply to all of his devices.
Similarly, it allows Bob to process the verification on one device
without having to involve all of his devices.
When Bob's device receives an m.key.verification.request
, it should
prompt Bob to verify keys with Alice using one of the supported methods
in the request. If Bob's device does not understand any of the methods,
it should not cancel the request as one of his other devices may support
the request. Instead, Bob's device should tell Bob that an unsupported
method was used for starting key verification. The prompt for Bob to
accept/reject Alice's request (or the unsupported method prompt) should
be automatically dismissed 10 minutes after the timestamp
field or 2
minutes after Bob's client receives the message, whichever comes first,
if Bob does not interact with the prompt. The prompt should additionally
be hidden if an appropriate m.key.verification.cancel
message is
received.
If Bob rejects the request, Bob's client must send an
m.key.verification.cancel
message to Alice's device. Upon receipt,
Alice's device should tell her that Bob does not want to verify her
device and send m.key.verification.cancel
messages to all of Bob's
devices to notify them that the request was rejected.
If Bob accepts the request, Bob's device starts the key verification
process by sending an m.key.verification.start
message to Alice's
device. Upon receipt of this message, Alice's device should send an
m.key.verification.cancel
message to all of Bob's other devices to
indicate the process has been started. The start message must use the
same transaction_id
from the original key verification request if it
is in response to the request. The start message can be sent
independently of any request.
Individual verification methods may add additional steps, events, and
properties to the verification messages. Event types for methods defined
in this specification must be under the m.key.verification
namespace
and any other event types must be namespaced according to the Java
package naming convention.
Any of Alice's or Bob's devices can cancel the key verification request
or process at any time with an m.key.verification.cancel
message to
all applicable devices.
This framework yields the following handshake, assuming both Alice and Bob each have 2 devices, Bob's first device accepts the key verification request, and Alice's second device initiates the request. Note how Alice's first device is not involved in the request or verification process.
+---------------+ +---------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+
| AliceDevice1 | | AliceDevice2 | | BobDevice1 | | BobDevice2 |
+---------------+ +---------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+
| | | |
| | m.key.verification.request | |
| |---------------------------------->| |
| | | |
| | m.key.verification.request | |
| |-------------------------------------------------->|
| | | |
| | m.key.verification.start | |
| |<----------------------------------| |
| | | |
| | m.key.verification.cancel | |
| |-------------------------------------------------->|
| | | |
After the handshake, the verification process begins.
{{m_key_verification_request_event}}
{{m_key_verification_start_event}}
{{m_key_verification_cancel_event}}
Short Authentication String (SAS) verification
SAS verification is a user-friendly key verification process built off the common framework outlined above. SAS verification is intended to be a highly interactive process for users, and as such exposes verification methods which are easier for users to use.
The verification process is heavily inspired by Phil Zimmermann's ZRTP key agreement handshake. A key part of key agreement in ZRTP is the hash commitment: the party that begins the Diffie-Hellman key sharing sends a hash of their part of the Diffie-Hellman exchange, and does not send their part of the Diffie-Hellman exchange until they have received the other party's part. Thus an attacker essentially only has one attempt to attack the Diffie-Hellman exchange, and hence we can verify fewer bits while still achieving a high degree of security: if we verify n bits, then an attacker has a 1 in 2n chance of success. For example, if we verify 40 bits, then an attacker has a 1 in 1,099,511,627,776 chance (or less than 1 in 1012 chance) of success. A failed attack would result in a mismatched Short Authentication String, alerting users to the attack.
The verification process takes place over to-device messages in two phases:
- Key agreement phase (based on ZRTP key agreement).
- Key verification phase (based on HMAC).
The process between Alice and Bob verifying each other would be:
- Alice and Bob establish a secure out-of-band connection, such as meeting in-person or a video call. "Secure" here means that either party cannot be impersonated, not explicit secrecy.
- Alice and Bob communicate which devices they'd like to verify with each other.
- Alice selects Bob's device from the device list and begins verification.
- Alice's client ensures it has a copy of Bob's device key.
- Alice's device sends Bob's device an
m.key.verification.start
message. - Bob's device receives the message and selects a key agreement protocol, hash algorithm, message authentication code, and SAS method supported by Alice's device.
- Bob's device ensures it has a copy of Alice's device key.
- Bob's device creates an ephemeral Curve25519 key pair (KBprivate, KBpubli**c), and calculates the hash (using the chosen algorithm) of the public key KBpubli**c.
- Bob's device replies to Alice's device with an
m.key.verification.accept
message. - Alice's device receives Bob's message and stores the commitment hash for later use.
- Alice's device creates an ephemeral Curve25519 key pair
(KAprivate, KApubli**c)
and replies to Bob's device with an
m.key.verification.key
, sending only the public key KApubli**c. - Bob's device receives Alice's message and replies with its own
m.key.verification.key
message containing its public key KBpubli**c. - Alice's device receives Bob's message and verifies the commitment
hash from earlier matches the hash of the key Bob's device just sent
and the content of Alice's
m.key.verification.start
message. - Both Alice and Bob's devices perform an Elliptic-curve Diffie-Hellman (ECD**H(KAprivate, KBpubli**c)), using the result as the shared secret.
- Both Alice and Bob's devices display a SAS to their users, which is derived from the shared key using one of the methods in this section. If multiple SAS methods are available, clients should allow the users to select a method.
- Alice and Bob compare the strings shown by their devices, and tell their devices if they match or not.
- Assuming they match, Alice and Bob's devices calculate the HMAC of their own device keys and a comma-separated sorted list of the key IDs that they wish the other user to verify, using SHA-256 as the hash function. HMAC is defined in RFC 2104. The key for the HMAC is different for each item and is calculated by generating 32 bytes (256 bits) using the key verification HKDF.
- Alice's device sends Bob's device an
m.key.verification.mac
message containing the MAC of Alice's device keys and the MAC of her key IDs to be verified. Bob's device does the same for Bob's device keys and key IDs concurrently with Alice. - When the other device receives the
m.key.verification.mac
message, the device calculates the HMAC of its copies of the other device's keys given in the message, as well as the HMAC of the comma-separated, sorted, list of key IDs in the message. The device compares these with the HMAC values given in the message, and if everything matches then the device keys are verified.
The wire protocol looks like the following between Alice and Bob's devices:
+-------------+ +-----------+
| AliceDevice | | BobDevice |
+-------------+ +-----------+
| |
| m.key.verification.start |
|-------------------------------->|
| |
| m.key.verification.accept |
|<--------------------------------|
| |
| m.key.verification.key |
|-------------------------------->|
| |
| m.key.verification.key |
|<--------------------------------|
| |
| m.key.verification.mac |
|-------------------------------->|
| |
| m.key.verification.mac |
|<--------------------------------|
| |
Error and exception handling
At any point the interactive verification can go wrong. The following describes what to do when an error happens:
- Alice or Bob can cancel the verification at any time. An
m.key.verification.cancel
message must be sent to signify the cancellation. - The verification can time out. Clients should time out a
verification that does not complete within 10 minutes. Additionally,
clients should expire a
transaction_id
which goes unused for 10 minutes after having last sent/received it. The client should inform the user that the verification timed out, and send an appropriatem.key.verification.cancel
message to the other device. - When the same device attempts to initiate multiple verification attempts, the recipient should cancel all attempts with that device.
- When a device receives an unknown
transaction_id
, it should send an appropriatem.key.verification.cancel
message to the other device indicating as such. This does not apply for inboundm.key.verification.start
orm.key.verification.cancel
messages. - If the two devices do not share a common key share, hash, HMAC, or
SAS method then the device should notify the other device with an
appropriate
m.key.verification.cancel
message. - If the user claims the Short Authentication Strings do not match,
the device should send an appropriate
m.key.verification.cancel
message to the other device. - If the device receives a message out of sequence or that it was not
expecting, it should notify the other device with an appropriate
m.key.verification.cancel
message.
Verification messages specific to SAS
Building off the common framework, the following events are involved in SAS verification.
The m.key.verification.cancel
event is unchanged, however the
following error codes are used in addition to those already specified:
m.unknown_method
: The devices are unable to agree on the key agreement, hash, MAC, or SAS method.m.mismatched_commitment
: The hash commitment did not match.m.mismatched_sas
: The SAS did not match.
{{m_key_verification_start_m_sas_v1_event}}
{{m_key_verification_accept_event}}
{{m_key_verification_key_event}}
{{m_key_verification_mac_event}}
HKDF calculation
In all of the SAS methods, HKDF is as defined in RFC
5869 and uses the previously
agreed-upon hash function for the hash function. The shared secret is
supplied as the input keying material. No salt is used. When the
key_agreement_protocol
is curve25519-hkdf-sha256
, the info parameter
is the concatenation of:
- The string
MATRIX_KEY_VERIFICATION_SAS|
.- The Matrix ID of the user who sent the
m.key.verification.start
message, followed by|
.- The Device ID of the device which sent the
m.key.verification.start
message, followed by|
.- The public key from the
m.key.verification.key
message sent by the device which sent them.key.verification.start
message, followed by|
.- The Matrix ID of the user who sent the
m.key.verification.accept
message, followed by|
.- The Device ID of the device which sent the
m.key.verification.accept
message, followed by|
.- The public key from the
m.key.verification.key
message sent by the device which sent them.key.verification.accept
message, followed by|
.- The
transaction_id
being used.
When the key_agreement_protocol
is the deprecated method curve25519
,
the info parameter is the concatenation of:
- The string
MATRIX_KEY_VERIFICATION_SAS
.- The Matrix ID of the user who sent the
m.key.verification.start
message.- The Device ID of the device which sent the
m.key.verification.start
message.- The Matrix ID of the user who sent the
m.key.verification.accept
message.- The Device ID of the device which sent the
m.key.verification.accept
message.- The
transaction_id
being used.
New implementations are discouraged from implementing the curve25519
method.
Rationale
HKDF is used over the plain shared secret as it results in a harder attack as well as more uniform data to work with.
For verification of each party's device keys, HKDF is as defined in RFC 5869 and uses SHA-256 as the hash function. The shared secret is supplied as the input keying material. No salt is used, and in the info parameter is the concatenation of:
- The string
MATRIX_KEY_VERIFICATION_MAC
.- The Matrix ID of the user whose key is being MAC-ed.
- The Device ID of the device sending the MAC.
- The Matrix ID of the other user.
- The Device ID of the device receiving the MAC.
- The
transaction_id
being used.- The Key ID of the key being MAC-ed, or the string
KEY_IDS
if the item being MAC-ed is the list of key IDs.
SAS method: decimal
Generate 5 bytes using HKDF then take sequences of 13 bits to convert to decimal numbers (resulting in 3 numbers between 0 and 8191 inclusive each). Add 1000 to each calculated number.
The bitwise operations to get the numbers given the 5 bytes B0, B1, B2, B3, B4 would be:
- First: (B0 ≪ 5|B1 ≫ 3) + 1000
- Second: ((B1&0x7) ≪ 10|B2 ≪ 2|B3 ≫ 6) + 1000
- Third: ((B3&0x3F) ≪ 7|B4 ≫ 1) + 1000
The digits are displayed to the user either with an appropriate separator, such as dashes, or with the numbers on individual lines.
SAS method: emoji
Generate 6 bytes using HKDF then split the first 42 bits into 7 groups of 6 bits, similar to how one would base64 encode something. Convert each group of 6 bits to a number and use the following table to get the corresponding emoji:
{{sas_emoji_table}}
Note
This table is available as JSON at https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/master/data-definitions/sas-emoji.json
Rationale
The emoji above were chosen to:
- Be recognisable without colour.
- Be recognisable at a small size.
- Be recognisable by most cultures.
- Be distinguishable from each other.
- Easily described by a few words.
- Avoid symbols with negative connotations.
- Be likely similar across multiple platforms.
Clients SHOULD show the emoji with the descriptions from the table, or appropriate translation of those descriptions. Client authors SHOULD collaborate to create a common set of translations for all languages.
Note
Known translations for the emoji are available from https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/master/data-definitions/ and can be translated online: https://translate.riot.im/projects/matrix-doc/sas-emoji-v1
Cross-signing
Rather than requiring Alice to verify each of Bob's devices with each of her own devices and vice versa, the cross-signing feature allows users to sign their device keys such that Alice and Bob only need to verify once. With cross-signing, each user has a set of cross-signing keys that are used to sign their own device keys and other users' keys, and can be used to trust device keys that were not verified directly.
Each user has three ed25519 key pairs for cross-signing:
- a master key (MSK) that serves as the user's identity in cross-signing and signs their other cross-signing keys;
- a user-signing key (USK) -- only visible to the user that it belongs to --that signs other users' master keys; and
- a self-signing key (SSK) that signs the user's own device keys.
The master key may also be used to sign other items such as the backup key. The master key may also be signed by the user's own device keys to aid in migrating from device verifications: if Alice's device had previously verified Bob's device and Bob's device has signed his master key, then Alice's device can trust Bob's master key, and she can sign it with her user-signing key.
Users upload their cross-signing keys to the server using POST
/_matrix/client/r0/keys/device_signing/upload. When Alice uploads
new cross-signing keys, her user ID will appear in the changed
property of the device_lists
field of the /sync
of response of all
users who share an encrypted room with her. When Bob sees Alice's user
ID in his /sync
, he will call POST /_matrix/client/r0/keys/query
to retrieve Alice's device and cross-signing keys.
If Alice has a device and wishes to send an encrypted message to Bob, she can trust Bob's device if:
- Alice's device is using a master key that has signed her user-signing key,
- Alice's user-signing key has signed Bob's master key,
- Bob's master key has signed Bob's self-signing key, and
- Bob's self-signing key has signed Bob's device key.
The following diagram illustrates how keys are signed:
+------------------+ .................. +----------------+
| +--------------+ | .................. : | +------------+ |
| | v v v : : v v v | |
| | +-----------+ : : +-----------+ | |
| | | Alice MSK | : : | Bob MSK | | |
| | +-----------+ : : +-----------+ | |
| | | : : : : | | |
| | +--+ :... : : ...: +--+ | |
| | v v : : v v | |
| | +-----------+ ............. : : ............. +-----------+ | |
| | | Alice SSK | : Alice USK : : : : Bob USK : | Bob SSK | | |
| | +-----------+ :...........: : : :...........: +-----------+ | |
| | | ... | : : : : | ... | | |
| | V V :........: :........: V V | |
| | +---------+ -+ +---------+ -+ | |
| | | Devices | ...| | Devices | ...| | |
| | +---------+ -+ +---------+ -+ | |
| | | ... | | ... | | |
| +------+ | | +----+ |
+----------------+ +--------------+
In the diagram, boxes represent keys and lines represent signatures with the arrows pointing from the signing key to the key being signed. Dotted boxes and lines represent keys and signatures that are only visible to the user who created them.
The following diagram illustrates Alice's view, hiding the keys and signatures that she cannot see:
+------------------+ +----------------+ +----------------+
| +--------------+ | | | | +------------+ |
| | v v | v v v | |
| | +-----------+ | +-----------+ | |
| | | Alice MSK | | | Bob MSK | | |
| | +-----------+ | +-----------+ | |
| | | | | | | |
| | +--+ +--+ | +--+ | |
| | v v | v | |
| | +-----------+ +-----------+ | +-----------+ | |
| | | Alice SSK | | Alice USK | | | Bob SSK | | |
| | +-----------+ +-----------+ | +-----------+ | |
| | | ... | | | | ... | | |
| | V V +--------+ V V | |
| | +---------+ -+ +---------+ -+ | |
| | | Devices | ...| | Devices | ...| | |
| | +---------+ -+ +---------+ -+ | |
| | | ... | | ... | | |
| +------+ | | +----+ |
+----------------+ +--------------+
Verification methods can be used to verify a
user's master key by using the master public key, encoded using unpadded
base64, as the device ID, and treating it as a normal device. For
example, if Alice and Bob verify each other using SAS, Alice's
m.key.verification.mac
message to Bob may include
"ed25519:alices+master+public+key": "alices+master+public+key"
in the
mac
property. Servers therefore must ensure that device IDs will not
collide with cross-signing public keys.
Key and signature security
A user's master key could allow an attacker to impersonate that user to other users, or other users to that user. Thus clients must ensure that the private part of the master key is treated securely. If clients do not have a secure means of storing the master key (such as a secret storage system provided by the operating system), then clients must not store the private part.
If a user's client sees that any other user has changed their master key, that client must notify the user about the change before allowing communication between the users to continue.
A user's user-signing and self-signing keys are intended to be easily replaceable if they are compromised by re-issuing a new key signed by the user's master key and possibly by re-verifying devices or users. However, doing so relies on the user being able to notice when their keys have been compromised, and it involves extra work for the user, and so although clients do not have to treat the private parts as sensitively as the master key, clients should still make efforts to store the private part securely, or not store it at all. Clients will need to balance the security of the keys with the usability of signing users and devices when performing key verification.
To avoid leaking of social graphs, servers will only allow users to see:
- signatures made by the user's own master, self-signing or user-signing keys,
- signatures made by the user's own devices about their own master key,
- signatures made by other users' self-signing keys about their respective devices,
- signatures made by other users' master keys about their respective self-signing key, or
- signatures made by other users' devices about their respective master keys.
Users will not be able to see signatures made by other users' user-signing keys.
{{cross_signing_cs_http_api}}
Sharing keys between devices
If Bob has an encrypted conversation with Alice on his computer, and then logs in through his phone for the first time, he may want to have access to the previously exchanged messages. To address this issue, several methods are provided to allow users to transfer keys from one device to another.
Key requests
When a device is missing keys to decrypt messages, it can request the
keys by sending m.room_key_request to-device messages to other
devices with action
set to request
.
If a device wishes to share the keys with that device, it can forward
the keys to the first device by sending an encrypted
m.forwarded_room_key to-device message. The first device should
then send an m.room_key_request to-device message with action
set to request_cancellation
to the other devices that it had
originally sent the key request to; a device that receives a
request_cancellation
should disregard any previously-received
request
message with the same request_id
and requesting_device_id
.
If a device does not wish to share keys with that device, it can indicate this by sending an m.room_key.withheld to-device message, as described in Reporting that decryption keys are withheld.
Note
Key sharing can be a big attack vector, thus it must be done very carefully. A reasonable strategy is for a user's client to only send keys requested by the verified devices of the same user.
Server-side key backups
Devices may upload encrypted copies of keys to the server. When a device tries to read a message that it does not have keys for, it may request the key from the server and decrypt it. Backups are per-user, and users may replace backups with new backups.
In contrast with Key requests, Server-side key backups do not require another device to be online from which to request keys. However, as the session keys are stored on the server encrypted, it requires users to enter a decryption key to decrypt the session keys.
To create a backup, a client will call POST
/_matrix/client/r0/room_keys/version and define how the keys are to
be encrypted through the backup's auth_data
; other clients can
discover the backup by calling GET
/_matrix/client/r0/room_keys/version. Keys are encrypted according
to the backup's auth_data
and added to the backup by calling PUT
/_matrix/client/r0/room_keys/keys or one of its variants, and can
be retrieved by calling GET /_matrix/client/r0/room_keys/keys or
one of its variants. Keys can only be written to the most recently
created version of the backup. Backups can also be deleted using DELETE
/_matrix/client/r0/room_keys/version/{version}, or individual keys
can be deleted using DELETE /_matrix/client/r0/room_keys/keys or
one of its variants.
Clients must only store keys in backups after they have ensured that the
auth_data
is trusted, either by checking the signatures on it, or by
deriving the public key from a private key that it obtained from a
trusted source.
When a client uploads a key for a session that the server already has a key for, the server will choose to either keep the existing key or replace it with the new key based on the key metadata as follows:
- if the keys have different values for
is_verified
, then it will keep the key that hasis_verified
set totrue
; - if they have the same values for
is_verified
, then it will keep the key with a lowerfirst_message_index
; - and finally, is
is_verified
andfirst_message_index
are equal, then it will keep the key with a lowerforwarded_count
.
Recovery key
If the recovery key (the private half of the backup encryption key) is presented to the user to save, it is presented as a string constructed as follows:
- The 256-bit curve25519 private key is prepended by the bytes
0x8B
and0x01
- All the bytes in the string above, including the two header bytes, are XORed together to form a parity byte. This parity byte is appended to the byte string.
- The byte string is encoded using base58, using the same mapping as
is used for Bitcoin
addresses,
that is, using the alphabet
123456789ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz
. - A space should be added after every 4th character.
When reading in a recovery key, clients must disregard whitespace, and perform the reverse of steps 1 through 3.
Backup algorithm: m.megolm_backup.v1.curve25519-aes-sha2
When a backup is created with the algorithm
set to
m.megolm_backup.v1.curve25519-aes-sha2
, the auth_data
should have
the following format:
AuthData
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
public_key |
string |
Required. The curve25519 public key used to encrypt the backups, encoded in unpadded base64. |
signatures |
Signatures |
Optional. Signatures of the |
The session_data
field in the backups is constructed as follows:
-
Encode the session key to be backed up as a JSON object with the properties:
Parameter Type Description algorithm
string
Required. The end-to-end message encryption algorithm that the key is for. Must be
m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2
.forwarding_curve25519_key_chain
[string]
Required. Chain of Curve25519 keys through which this session was forwarded, via m.forwarded_room_key events.
sender_key
string
Required. Unpadded base64-encoded device curve25519 key.
sender_claimed_keys
{string: string}
Required. A map from algorithm name (
ed25519
) to the identity key for the sending device.session_key
string
Required. Unpadded base64-encoded session key in session-sharing format.
-
Generate an ephemeral curve25519 key, and perform an ECDH with the ephemeral key and the backup's public key to generate a shared secret. The public half of the ephemeral key, encoded using unpadded base64, becomes the
ephemeral
property of thesession_data
. -
Using the shared secret, generate 80 bytes by performing an HKDF using SHA-256 as the hash, with a salt of 32 bytes of 0, and with the empty string as the info. The first 32 bytes are used as the AES key, the next 32 bytes are used as the MAC key, and the last 16 bytes are used as the AES initialization vector.
-
Stringify the JSON object, and encrypt it using AES-CBC-256 with PKCS#7 padding. This encrypted data, encoded using unpadded base64, becomes the
ciphertext
property of thesession_data
. -
Pass the raw encrypted data (prior to base64 encoding) through HMAC-SHA-256 using the MAC key generated above. The first 8 bytes of the resulting MAC are base64-encoded, and become the
mac
property of thesession_data
.
{{key_backup_cs_http_api}}
Key exports
Keys can be manually exported from one device to an encrypted file, copied to another device, and imported. The file is encrypted using a user-supplied passphrase, and is created as follows:
-
Encode the sessions as a JSON object, formatted as described in Key export format.
-
Generate a 512-bit key from the user-entered passphrase by computing PBKDF2(HMAC-SHA-512, passphrase, S, N, 512), where S is a 128-bit cryptographically-random salt and N is the number of rounds. N should be at least 100,000. The keys K and K' are set to the first and last 256 bits of this generated key, respectively. K is used as an AES-256 key, and K' is used as an HMAC-SHA-256 key.
-
Serialize the JSON object as a UTF-8 string, and encrypt it using AES-CTR-256 with the key K generated above, and with a 128-bit cryptographically-random initialization vector, IV, that has bit 63 set to zero. (Setting bit 63 to zero in IV is needed to work around differences in implementations of AES-CTR.)
-
Concatenate the following data:
Size (bytes) Description 1 Export format version, which must be 0x01
.16 The salt S. 16 The initialization vector IV. 4 The number of rounds N, as a big-endian unsigned 32-bit integer. variable The encrypted JSON object. 32
The HMAC-SHA-256 of all the above string concatenated together, using K' as the key.
-
Base64-encode the string above. Newlines may be added to avoid overly long lines.
-
Prepend the resulting string with
-----BEGIN MEGOLM SESSION DATA-----
, with a trailing newline, and append-----END MEGOLM SESSION DATA-----
, with a leading and trailing newline.
Key export format
The exported sessions are formatted as a JSON array of SessionData
objects described as follows:
SessionData
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
algorithm |
string |
Required. The encryption algorithm that the session uses. Must be |
forwarding_curve25519_key_chain |
[string] |
Required. Chain of Curve25519 keys through which this session was forwarded, via m.forwarded_room_key events. |
room_id |
string |
Required. The room where the session is used. |
sender_key |
string |
Required. The Curve25519 key of the device which initiated the session originally. |
sender_claimed_keys |
{string: string} |
Required. The Ed25519 key of the device which initiated the session originally. |
session_id | string | Required. The ID of the session. |
session_key | string | Required. The key for the session. |
This is similar to the format before encryption used for the session
keys in Server-side key backups but adds the
room_id
and session_id
fields.
Example:
[
{
"algorithm": "m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2",
"forwarding_curve25519_key_chain": [
"hPQNcabIABgGnx3/ACv/jmMmiQHoeFfuLB17tzWp6Hw"
],
"room_id": "!Cuyf34gef24t:localhost",
"sender_key": "RF3s+E7RkTQTGF2d8Deol0FkQvgII2aJDf3/Jp5mxVU",
"sender_claimed_keys": {
"ed25519": "<device ed25519 identity key>",
},
"session_id": "X3lUlvLELLYxeTx4yOVu6UDpasGEVO0Jbu+QFnm0cKQ",
"session_key": "AgAAAADxKHa9uFxcXzwYoNueL5Xqi69IkD4sni8Llf..."
},
...
]
Messaging Algorithms
Messaging Algorithm Names
Messaging algorithm names use the extensible naming scheme used
throughout this specification. Algorithm names that start with m.
are
reserved for algorithms defined by this specification. Implementations
wanting to experiment with new algorithms must be uniquely globally
namespaced following Java's package naming conventions.
Algorithm names should be short and meaningful, and should list the primitives used by the algorithm so that it is easier to see if the algorithm is using a broken primitive.
A name of m.olm.v1
is too short: it gives no information about the
primitives in use, and is difficult to extend for different primitives.
However a name of
m.olm.v1.ecdh-curve25519-hdkfsha256.hmacsha256.hkdfsha256-aes256-cbc-hmac64sha256
is too long despite giving a more precise description of the algorithm:
it adds to the data transfer overhead and sacrifices clarity for human
readers without adding any useful extra information.
m.olm.v1.curve25519-aes-sha2
The name m.olm.v1.curve25519-aes-sha2
corresponds to version 1 of the
Olm ratchet, as defined by the Olm
specification. This uses:
- Curve25519 for the initial key agreement.
- HKDF-SHA-256 for ratchet key derivation.
- Curve25519 for the root key ratchet.
- HMAC-SHA-256 for the chain key ratchet.
- HKDF-SHA-256, AES-256 in CBC mode, and 8 byte truncated HMAC-SHA-256 for authenticated encryption.
Devices that support Olm must include "m.olm.v1.curve25519-aes-sha2" in their list of supported messaging algorithms, must list a Curve25519 device key, and must publish Curve25519 one-time keys.
An event encrypted using Olm has the following format:
{
"type": "m.room.encrypted",
"content": {
"algorithm": "m.olm.v1.curve25519-aes-sha2",
"sender_key": "<sender_curve25519_key>",
"ciphertext": {
"<device_curve25519_key>": {
"type": 0,
"body": "<encrypted_payload_base_64>"
}
}
}
}
ciphertext
is a mapping from device Curve25519 key to an encrypted
payload for that device. body
is a Base64-encoded Olm message body.
type
is an integer indicating the type of the message body: 0 for the
initial pre-key message, 1 for ordinary messages.
Olm sessions will generate messages with a type of 0 until they receive a message. Once a session has decrypted a message it will produce messages with a type of 1.
When a client receives a message with a type of 0 it must first check if it already has a matching session. If it does then it will use that session to try to decrypt the message. If there is no existing session then the client must create a new session and use the new session to decrypt the message. A client must not persist a session or remove one-time keys used by a session until it has successfully decrypted a message using that session.
Messages with type 1 can only be decrypted with an existing session. If there is no matching session, the client must treat this as an invalid message.
The plaintext payload is of the form:
{
"type": "<type of the plaintext event>",
"content": "<content for the plaintext event>",
"sender": "<sender_user_id>",
"recipient": "<recipient_user_id>",
"recipient_keys": {
"ed25519": "<our_ed25519_key>"
},
"keys": {
"ed25519": "<sender_ed25519_key>"
}
}
The type and content of the plaintext message event are given in the payload.
Other properties are included in order to prevent an attacker from
publishing someone else's curve25519 keys as their own and subsequently
claiming to have sent messages which they didn't. sender
must
correspond to the user who sent the event, recipient
to the local
user, and recipient_keys
to the local ed25519 key.
Clients must confirm that the sender_key
and the ed25519
field value
under the keys
property match the keys returned by /keys/query
_ for
the given user, and must also verify the signature of the payload.
Without this check, a client cannot be sure that the sender device owns
the private part of the ed25519 key it claims to have in the Olm
payload. This is crucial when the ed25519 key corresponds to a verified
device.
If a client has multiple sessions established with another device, it should use the session from which it last received and successfully decrypted a message. For these purposes, a session that has not received any messages should use its creation time as the time that it last received a message. A client may expire old sessions by defining a maximum number of olm sessions that it will maintain for each device, and expiring sessions on a Least Recently Used basis. The maximum number of olm sessions maintained per device should be at least 4.
Recovering from undecryptable messages
Occasionally messages may be undecryptable by clients due to a variety of reasons. When this happens to an Olm-encrypted message, the client should assume that the Olm session has become corrupted and create a new one to replace it.
Note
Megolm-encrypted messages generally do not have the same problem. Usually the key for an undecryptable Megolm-encrypted message will come later, allowing the client to decrypt it successfully. Olm does not have a way to recover from the failure, making this session replacement process required.
To establish a new session, the client sends an m.dummy to-device event to the other party to notify them of the new session details.
Clients should rate-limit the number of sessions it creates per device that it receives a message from. Clients should not create a new session with another device if it has already created one for that given device in the past 1 hour.
Clients should attempt to mitigate loss of the undecryptable messages.
For example, Megolm sessions that were sent using the old session would
have been lost. The client can attempt to retrieve the lost sessions
through m.room_key_request
messages.
m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2
The name m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2
corresponds to version 1 of the Megolm
ratchet, as defined by the Megolm
specification. This uses:
- HMAC-SHA-256 for the hash ratchet.
- HKDF-SHA-256, AES-256 in CBC mode, and 8 byte truncated HMAC-SHA-256 for authenticated encryption.
- Ed25519 for message authenticity.
Devices that support Megolm must support Olm, and include "m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2" in their list of supported messaging algorithms.
An event encrypted using Megolm has the following format:
{
"type": "m.room.encrypted",
"content": {
"algorithm": "m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2",
"sender_key": "<sender_curve25519_key>",
"device_id": "<sender_device_id>",
"session_id": "<outbound_group_session_id>",
"ciphertext": "<encrypted_payload_base_64>"
}
}
The encrypted payload can contain any message event. The plaintext is of the form:
{
"type": "<event_type>",
"content": "<event_content>",
"room_id": "<the room_id>"
}
We include the room ID in the payload, because otherwise the homeserver would be able to change the room a message was sent in.
Clients must guard against replay attacks by keeping track of the ratchet indices of Megolm sessions. They should reject messages with a ratchet index that they have already decrypted. Care should be taken in order to avoid false positives, as a client may decrypt the same event twice as part of its normal processing.
As with Olm events, clients must confirm that the sender_key
belongs
to the user who sent the message. The same reasoning applies, but the
sender ed25519 key has to be inferred from the keys.ed25519
property
of the event which established the Megolm session.
In order to enable end-to-end encryption in a room, clients can send an
m.room.encryption
state event specifying m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2
as its
algorithm
property.
When creating a Megolm session in a room, clients must share the
corresponding session key using Olm with the intended recipients, so
that they can decrypt future messages encrypted using this session. An
m.room_key
event is used to do this. Clients must also handle
m.room_key
events sent by other devices in order to decrypt their
messages.
Protocol definitions
Events
{{m_room_encryption_event}}
{{m_room_encrypted_event}}
{{m_room_key_event}}
{{m_room_key_request_event}}
{{m_forwarded_room_key_event}}
{{m_dummy_event}}
Key management API
{{keys_cs_http_api}}
Extensions to /sync
This module adds an optional device_lists
property to the _ response,
as specified below. The server need only populate this property for an
incremental /sync
(i.e., one where the since
parameter was
specified). The client is expected to use /keys/query
_ or
/keys/changes
_ for the equivalent functionality after an initial
sync, as documented in Tracking the device list for a
user.
It also adds a one_time_keys_count
property. Note the spelling
difference with the one_time_key_counts
property in the
/keys/upload
_ response.
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
device_lists |
DeviceLists |
Optional. Information on e2e device updates. Note: only present on an incremental sync. |
device_one_time_keys_count |
{string: integer} |
Optional. For each key algorithm, the number of unclaimed one-time keys currently held on the server for this device. |
DeviceLists
Parameter | Type | Description |
---|---|---|
changed |
[string] |
List of users who have updated their device identity or cross-signing keys, or who now share an encrypted room with the client since the previous sync response. |
left |
[string] |
List of users with whom we do not share any encrypted rooms anymore since the previous sync response. |
Note
For optimal performance, Alice should be added to changed
in Bob's
sync only when she updates her devices or cross-signing keys, or when
Alice and Bob now share a room but didn't share any room previously.
However, for the sake of simpler logic, a server may add Alice to
changed
when Alice and Bob share a new room, even if they previously
already shared a room.
Example response:
{
"next_batch": "s72595_4483_1934",
"rooms": {"leave": {}, "join": {}, "invite": {}},
"device_lists": {
"changed": [
"@alice:example.com",
],
"left": [
"@bob:example.com",
],
},
"device_one_time_keys_count": {
"curve25519": 10,
"signed_curve25519": 20
}
}
Reporting that decryption keys are withheld
When sending an encrypted event to a room, a client can optionally signal to other devices in that room that it is not sending them the keys needed to decrypt the event. In this way, the receiving client can indicate to the user why it cannot decrypt the event, rather than just showing a generic error message.
In the same way, when one device requests keys from another using Key requests, the device from which the key is being requested may want to tell the requester that it is purposely not sharing the key.
If Alice withholds a megolm session from Bob for some messages in a
room, and then later on decides to allow Bob to decrypt later messages,
she can send Bob the megolm session, ratcheted up to the point at which
she allows Bob to decrypt the messages. If Bob logs into a new device
and uses key sharing to obtain the decryption keys, the new device will
be sent the megolm sessions that have been ratcheted up. Bob's old
device can include the reason that the session was initially not shared
by including a withheld
property in the m.forwarded_room_key
message
that is an object with the code
and reason
properties from the
m.room_key.withheld
message.
{{m_room_key_withheld_event}}