aescrypt | opinionated AES encrypt / decrypt Ruby gem | Encryption library

I get what you're asking but think it's not the right way to think about the security of your memory.

What's the threat actor - another process? The operating system? The root user?

If you don't trust the root user, the OS, and the hardware, you've already lost.

If you have to trust them, then what else is your threat actor? You have to trust your application. So the only other things are other applications running on the same system.

The operating system prevents other applications from reading your memory space (SEG FAULT, etc). And the OS zeros out your application's memory pages before passing them to another process.

But that's not the whole story - read https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/29019/are-passwords-stored-in-memory-safe for even more details.

You are not decoding the encryption key properly before encryption/decryption. The decoding of that key from String to bytes using UTF-8 will yield 44 bytes. Try decoding that key from String to bytes using base 64 instead:

Try using Session with HttpContext as below:-

I have the same problem, I found the next "temporary" solution, uninstall the WEBVIEW updates from the device.

WEBVIEW: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.webview

SOURSE: https://www.clubedohardware.com.br/topic/1530756-erro-ao-abrir-apps-j%C3%A1-%C3%A9-o-terceiro/?do=findComment&comment=8132908

It worked for me.

UPDATE

Google released yesterday (March 22) an update to WEBVIEW and GOOGLE CHROME application, download that update and the problem will be fixed.

FOR ENCRYPTION:

1. We are using HMAC-sha256 for generating "key", which takes "salt", "password".

No, you are using PBKDF2 WITH HMAC-SHA256. That's not at all the same thing as plain HMAC-SHA256. However, the OpenSSL function you identified DOES match this assuming you give it the correct parameters. This also applies to decryption step 1.

1. Padding input data.

Sort of. That padding only works correctly for input data that is up to 16 characters, all of which are ASCII (because you encode it as UTF-8, and any non-ASCII character produces more than one byte, making the encoded value an illegal length). Most longer values will fail, although a few will succeed by bad luck. And even for the values that 'succeed', some will be changed; this is considered bad practice and essentially all competently designed crypto schemes since about 1980 are designed to preserve all data. In particular the very common PKCS5 (sometimes called PKCS7 or PKCS5/PKCS7 for technical reasons) standard padding preserves all data correctly and is already implemented in both Java and OpenSSL, as well as nearly all other decent crypto libraries and devices, and would be a better choice as well as simpler.

With the padding fixed, the Java side could do non-ASCII data, but only if you both encode the plaintext to be encrypted and decode the plaintext after decryption suitably. You have the .getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8) on encrypt, but need to match it with new String(cipher.doFinal(...), StandardCharsets.UTF_8) on decrypt, otherwise it may or may not work depending on the platform and environment you use to run it.

The C side may be harder. OpenSSL is based on old-school C code started before the 1995 and 1999 versions of C started to handle non-English characters, and it understands only bytes, which can be single-byte aka 'narrow' characters. Either you must wrap it with calling code that handles 'wide' characters in a multi-byte encoding such as UTF-8 (and calls the OpenSSL parts using bytes), or you must do this outside the program, by controlling the environment (such as the terminal or emulator) or files. Your question doesn't provide even a hint about any of those, so it's impossible to make any recommendation(s).

Because you treat the 'secret' (password), salt, and IV as Strings, the same considerations apply to them, except that they are likely to come from different source(s) than the data. IV and salt are designed to be byte sequences, and restricting IV in particular to ASCII or even UTF-8 encodings probably reduces security some, but as the topic of SO is programming and not security I won't pursue that. In actual PBKDF2 in PKCS5 password is also octets (Java bytes), but it 'recommends' that text (characters) be encoded as ASCII or UTF-8, and Java does take char[] in PBEKeySpec and encode as UTF-8, so for non-ASCII the OpenSSL caller or environment would need to match that.

Given those limitations: all values are ASCII only, data is not more than 16 chars=bytes and IV is exactly 16, the following C code matches and could interoperate with your Java. Error handling is minimal, and I do both encrypt and decrypt in a single function; you would want to be able to separate them. (corrected)

Try this. Maybe will work if you put code for encryption in isolate. For that use method compute.

As you are using different key and iv values in Java and Javascript it is ovious that you will different results in Java and Javascript, as you already were told from @Artjom B.

As well your "message to encrypt" ("toenc" or "body") differs as well and won't get the same result.

I setup a simplified Java program and adjusted some missing charset encodings. For simplicity I used just a simple string to test the en- and decryption on both sides - I leave it up to you to find an identical solution for your "message to encrypt" on Java and Javascript.

The Javascript program is using CryptoJS for encryption and gets the same input values for key, iv and plaintext.

Both programs give the same encrypted value in hex:

I manage to find a solution. I need to edit the get request function parameters to point to object rather plain string.

The correct code:

This happens because the Vert.x's event loop is blocked for more than 2 seconds, which is configurable. You can change this using following parameter:

quarkus.vertx.max-event-loop-execute-time