Bounty : OpenSSL with EC for Fedora/RH/CentOS : 3.6 BTC

[Tuxavant]

http://bitquestion.com/question/8

I would like someone to explain exactly how to build OpenSSL with EC on Fedora and make it available in RPM format in a personal repository. This is specifically to help Fedora users more easily build Bitcoin applications.

I need the following documented or explained:

Build OpenSSL with EC
Create/configure/maintain a .spec file
Build the OpenSSL RPM so that it is compatible with the existing Fedora OpenSSL version.
Generate/publish a PGP key for use in authenticating releases
Creating a repository and publishing the rpm

I can build the current version of OpenSSL source code. I am currently stuck at interpreting what needs to be done with the .spec file downloaded from the Fedora repository (/fedora/linux/updates/16/SRPMS/openssl-1.0.0j-1.fc16.src.rpm)

[1714220640]

1714220640

[1714220640]

1714220640

[1714220640]

1714220640

[1714220640]

1714220640

[kano]

I wanted to do this today ... and googled ... and found nothing useful ... and googled more ... and found this page ... and since googling gave me no actual answers ...
I did it myself.

Code:

Build openssl-1.0.0j with EC on fc16
------------------------------------

All this is run from root.

1) Find the correct SRC RPM

Update fc16 to the latest everything and get
 openssl-1.0.0j-1.fc16.src.rpm
from any mirror

or later if there is a later version
(this was written 7-Jun-2012)

N.B. these details are specific for openssl-1.0.0j
but most developers should be able to adapt this to later versions

2) rpm -Uvh openssl-1.0.0j-1.fc16.src.rpm

3) cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS

4) vim openssl.spec

look for "./Configure" at the start of a line
(in 1.0.0j-1.fc16 it is line 219)
about 3 lines down from that you will see:
 enable-cms enable-md2 no-idea no-mdc2 no-rc5 no-ec no-ecdh no-ecdsa \
change it to look like:
 enable-cms enable-md2 no-idea no-mdc2 no-rc5 enable-ec enable-ecdh enable-ecdsa \

search for
 Source1: hobble-openssl
(line 29) and change it (comment it out) to:
 #Source1: hobble-openssl

search for
 %{SOURCE1} > /dev/null
(line 133) and change it (comment it out) to:
 #%{SOURCE1} > /dev/null

go back to the top and increase "Release:"

line 24 increment the "Release:" number
e.g. change
 Release: 1%{?dist}
to
 Release: 2%{?dist}

5) install rpm-build
yum install rpm-build

6) cd ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/

in ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/ there is a file called "openssl-1.0.0j-usa.tar.xz"

rename it to "openssl-1.0.0j-usa.tar.xz.orig" (or whatever else you like)

get a full replacement for the tar file, at http://www.openssl.org/source/

 http://www.openssl.org/source/openssl-1.0.0j.tar.gz

and put it in the directory: ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/

then rename it to "openssl-1.0.0j-usa.tar.xz"

7) cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS

 rpmbuild -bb openssl.spec

8) You now have the RPM files you need in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/*/

FIN

I did this coz I wanted to build vanitygen (and it failed before I did this)

So in my ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/ directory I did:

 rpm -Uvh openssl-1.0.0j-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm openssl-devel-1.0.0j-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm

and now vanitygen builds (and runs) fine.

[kano]

I wonder how popular this page will become now with Fedora people
Since there really is no one who has written this, that is easy to find on the net, for the last 7+ years this issue has existed ...

[Tuxavant]

excellent work!

I had a discussion with a guy in #Fedora-dev who helped me out and gave me nearly the same instructions. I have been planning on giving it a go, but it's just been too busy.

Here's the overview of the discussion we had. We should compare notes and take it to the end - through setting up a repo. I may have some time to work on this today.

<wolfy> it's almost 3 AM over here so I will not be staying much longer
<wolfy> so let me tell you the basic stept
<wolfy> steps
<wolfy> 1. yum install fedora-packager
<wolfy> 2. decide what user you will use to build packages as. I use my normal user account
<wolfy> do not ever build as root
<wolfy> install mock
<wolfy> become the user you want to build as ( su - THATUSER)
<wolfy> run rpmdev-setuptree
<wolfy> download the openssl.src.rpm from fedora
<wolfy> rpm -i openssl.src.rpm ( this step will explode the src and allow you to later edit the spec )
<wolfy> download the original source
<wolfy> edit ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/openssl.spec
<wolfy> replace the file name in SOURCE0 with the name of the downloaded original
<wolfy> add a line in front of the %changelog section , using the same format as the existing ones
<wolfy> and put in there the new version and the comments that you seem fit for the changelog
<wolfy> ah, also, do not forget to edit the version and release fields from the top of the spec file, make them coincide with the name of the new source
<wolfy> save the spec file
<wolfy> run rpmbuild -bs  ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/openssl.spec
<wolfy> this will create a new src.rpm
<wolfy> let's say it's called  ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/newopenssl.src.rpm
<wolfy> run mock -r fedora-16-x86_64 ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/newopenssl.src.rpm
<wolfy> and come back to me with the issues that you face
<wolfy> ah
<wolfy> one more thing
<wolfy> you need to add the user that you will use to build to the group mock
<wolfy> after installing mock
<wolfy> otherwise mock will refuse to run

Ultimately I plan on hosting an openssl repository 'with signatures n shit' to make it even easier for people to use EC on Fedora.

[kano]

Yeah if you really wanted to give out RPM's to other people you'd also (as mentioned above by wolfy) change the "Source:" file name from "openssl-%{version}-usa.tar.xz" to "openssl-%{version}.tar.gz" in the spec file, so you can simply just grab the file from
http://www.openssl.org/source/
and create a new src.rpm using that gz file instead of the RedHat 'usa' file

The differences between the two tar files are that all the files related to the "patent" issue are present but empty in the 'usa' file.

From my reading about the issues with ECC now, I'd expect this problem to go away soon - as soon as RedHat legal gets off their asses and say something about it
The patent is already shown to not be valid in this case ... and even if for some stupid reason some typically zero intelligence judge did say the patent covers this, well it expires this year anyway from what I've read.

[Tuxavant]

The patent is already shown to not be valid in this case ... and even if for some stupid reason some typically zero intelligence judge did say the patent covers this, well it expires this year anyway from what I've read.

That's great news! Even so, this will prove to be a very enlightening and educational experience for me as I've wanted to help maintain other packages too. This ECDSA thing has motivate me to finally learn how this stuff works.

[marcus_of_augustus]

We need this in several places for Fedora (other RH-derivative) uses ... I can probably contribute.

[kano]

Well it's all there - I'm not sure what else is wanted since it's a simple google to get:
e.g. how to sign an RPM: http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-pgp-signing-packages.html

and if you mean a Yum repo - that's just 'createrepo -q .' in the directory above the repo and create a whatever.repo to point to it
(just like the repos in /etc/yum.repos.d/

Anyway those 2 bits of info are straight forward, the trick was to simply notice that the redhat usa tar file could be replaced by the official tar file (with some changes to the spec file and enabling the needed cryptos) and then it compiles without problems.

I guess you could even enable idea, rc5 and mdc2 if anyone wanted them also

I've been running vanitygen last night and imported a generated address into my wallet and that imported without any errors.

[Tuxavant]

Well it's all there - I'm not sure what else is wanted

To get through it and see it work. I just need some "alone time" which will probably happen tomorrow for me.

Can't wait to get my vanitygen on too!

[marcus_of_augustus]

From my reading about the issues with ECC now, I'd expect this problem to go away soon - as soon as RedHat legal gets off their asses and say something about it
The patent is already shown to not be valid in this case ... and even if for some stupid reason some typically zero intelligence judge did say the patent covers this, well it expires this year anyway from what I've read.

Ok, sounds promising. This tiny little EC copyright issue has been a PITA getting bitcoin projects built cleanly on RH platforms ... way out of proportion to the issue.

PS: nice work with the package, btw.

[kano]

Updated my sig (with vanitygen)

[Tuxavant]

nice. some bitcoin waiting for that addy when I close the bitquestion bounty. 

[kano]

nice. some bitcoin waiting for that addy when I close the bitquestion bounty.  

I'll make myself a longer one some time in the future - 4 character ones are really quick (I've got 78 of them already)
5 character ones are of course 58 times slower

So yeah it's nice to be able to play with vanitygen.
One thing to note (that's mentioned but probably should be highlighted in the bitcoind docs) is when you
 bitcoind importprivkey 5blah
You need to wait for quite a while ... and if you "tail -f" the "debug.log" it's a major WTF is it doing?

[wladston]

I'm trying to generate some 6~8 char longs for some months already ... it's really hard, but maybe I can get lucky ...

[rjk]

I'm trying to generate some 6~8 char longs for some months already ... it's really hard, but maybe I can get lucky ...

Months really? It shouldn't be taking that long.. Here, have a 9 char addy: 1FreenodeMrq7gKn91wR4meJKEbi9RNa8M
(since the 1 counts as a character)

That was found along with one other less desirable one - less desirable because of the case mixture like 1FreEnoDe - because it was lucky in case-insensitive mode. Even if you require case-sensitivity, I recommend you run it in non-case-sensitive mode because then you will get several options and might get lucky.

Also, oclvanitygen running on a 5870 or similar hardware is much better and faster.

[wladston]

I had no idea oclvanitygen was working. When I first used vanitygen, only the CPU mode worked. Will research, thanks for the info!

[daemonic]

has anyone managed to get this to work for Centos, it would appear that the security patches are all based on the fips version and if i edit to use the non fips source tarball, the patch hunks fail, so the rpm fails to build?

[Tuxavant]

absolutely pounded this week... forced to sit in a cold noisy datacenter most of the week with no "me" time at my desk. Wife and kids leaving town this weekend... so... hopefully soon.

[rjk]

absolutely pounded this week... forced to sit in a cold noisy datacenter most of the week with no "me" time at my desk. Wife and kids leaving town this weekend... so... hopefully soon.

Sounds like heaven!

I've always wanted a rack to myself with a desk inside. Office is always too warm and I like the sound of fans.

[Tuxavant]

in related news... I needed a vanity address so I ended up running vanitygen on wine on all my linux boxen. worked perfectly.