AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 26 Bitcoin

optiga: add v1 algo

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Marko Bencun

73/100 · Adequate
optiga: add v1 algo

- TestingHal defaults to Optiga, so the password algo defaults to
V1 (for ATECC it is V0). We do this because many tests check the
events counter, which only makes sense for Optiga.
- We won't adapt all tests to count the events for both V0 and V1,
that is overkill. We only count them for V1. Maybe we will add some select tests to count V0
events in the keystore only.
- init_new_password() only supports V1. V0 is only supported in
stretch_password() to allow unlocking seeds encrypted using V0.
✓ Subject identifies a change✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Explains rationale or failure mode✓ Mentions testing or verification
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit adds a new password-stretching algorithm (V1) for BitBox02 devices that use the Optiga secure chip. It changes how the device turns a user's password into an encryption key, adding extra secure-chip-backed hashing steps and enforcing that newly created passwords use the new algorithm. Old V0 passwords can still be unlocked for backward compatibility. There is no direct evidence in the commit of a security vulnerability being fixed; it reads as a planned feature/upgrade.

Recommended action

Treat as a routine firmware feature/algorithm upgrade. Review the V1 KDF flow for correct counter and authorization handling during normal QA, and verify that V0 unlock paths remain functional for existing users. No urgent security response is indicated by the supplied materials.

Security signals we found

01

New password-stretching algorithm (V1) implemented for Optiga secure chip

02

New algorithm uses additional write-protected HMAC key slot and extra monotonic counters

03

New-password creation now restricted to V1 only; V0 kept only for unlock compatibility

04

Unit-test event counters changed to reflect new secure-chip operations

05

No explicit security bug, CVE, or vulnerability description in commit message or diff

Risk score

Why this scored 26/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 5/30
Exploitability 3/25
Stealth signal 3/15
Affected reach 5/15
Confidence 7/10
Evidence quality 3/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.