USENIX Security2024Top-tier venue
"You have to read 50 different RFCs that contradict each other": An Interview Study on the Experiences of Implementing Cryptographic Standards
Nicolas Huaman, Jacques Suray, Jan H. Klemmer, Marcel Fourné, Sabrina Amft, Ivana Trummová, Yasemin Acar, Sascha Fahl
Abstract
Implementing cryptographic standards is a critical process for the cryptographic ecosystem. Cryptographic standards aim to support developers and engineers in implementing cryptographic primitives and protocols. However, past security incidents suggest that implementing cryptographic standards can be challenging and might jeopardize software and hardware security. We need to understand and mitigate the pain points of those implementing cryptographic standards to support them better. To shed light on the challenges and obstacles of implementing cryptographic standards, we conducted 20 semistructured interviews with experienced cryptographers and cryptographic software engineers. We identify common practices when implementing standards, including the criticality of reference and third-party implementations, test vectors to verify implementations, and the open standard community as central support for questions and reviews of implementations. Based on our findings, we recommend transparent standardization processes, strong (ideally formal) verification, improved support for comparing implementations, and covering updates and error handling in the standardization process. Previous research on cryptographic standards focused on vulnerabilities in standards or faulty implementations [74, 12, 15, 61, 24] , but did not consider the implementation process itself. We present and discuss in-depth insights from 20 semi-structured interviews with experienced implementers of cryptographic standards. We illustrate the challenges they encounter from the perspective of new and veteran developers in the cryptographic community and from an industry, academic, and hobbyist view. We hope our findings can contribute to easier-to-implement future cryptographic standards. Research Questions. In this work, we address the following research questions: RQ1: Which are developers' practices when implementing cryptographic standards? Implementing cryptographic standards is essential to deploy cryptography from research into products. We are interested in better understanding developers' implementation practices and requirements for cryptographic standards. RQ2: What are the challenges of implementing cryptographic standards? Cryptographic standards are complex and require a high level of expertise to understand and follow. We aim to understand the challenges of writing cryptographic software following standards. RQ3: How can future cryptographic standards be improved to better support implementations? The correct and secure implementation of cryptographic standards is crucial for overall software security. We aim to understand better how future cryptographic standards can be improved to support cryptographic software developers and implementations.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 7577276f-7959-4dc9-9430-3f18e26d3be0Cited by top-tier papers4
- Competing for Attention: An Interview Study with Participants of Cryptography CompetitionsIvana Trummová, Juliane Schmüser, Nicolas Huaman, Sascha FahlCCS 2025
- Behind the Curtain: How Shared Hosting Providers Respond to Vulnerability NotificationsGiada Stivala, Rafael Mrowczynski, Maria Hellenthal, Giancarlo PellegrinoS&P 2026
- The Ivory Tower Syndrome: Operators' Reflections on Academic BGP Security SolutionsAleeza Suhel Inamdar, Tobias Fiebig, Mannat KaurUSENIX Security 2026
- "That's my perspective from 30 years of doing this": An Interview Study on Practices, Experiences, and Challenges of Updating Cryptographic CodeAlexander Krause, Harjot Kaur, Jan H. Klemmer, Oliver Wiese et al.USENIX Security 2025
Builds on10
- The SPHINCS+ Signature FrameworkDaniel J. Bernstein, Andreas Hülsing, Stefan Kölbl, Ruben Niederhagen et al.CCS 2019 · 385 citations
- Comparing the Usability of Cryptographic APIsYasemin Acar, Michael Backes, Sascha Fahl, Simson L. Garfinkel et al.S&P 2017 · 261 citations
- "If HTTPS Were Secure, I Wouldn't Need 2FA" - End User and Administrator Mental Models of HTTPSKatharina Krombholz, Karoline Busse, Katharina Pfeffer, Matthew Smith et al.S&P 2019 · 105 citations
- The Last Mile: High-Assurance and High-Speed Cryptographic ImplementationsJosé Bacelar Almeida, Manuel Barbosa, Gilles Barthe, Benjamin Grégoire et al.S&P 2020 · 67 citations
- "They're not that hard to mitigate": What Cryptographic Library Developers Think About Timing AttacksJan Jancar, Marcel Fourné, Daniel De Almeida Braga, Mohamed Sabt et al.S&P 2022 · 61 citations
Related papers
- "I'm Pretty Expert and I Still Screw It Up": Qualitative Insights into Experiences and Challenges of Designing and Implementing Cryptographic Library APIsJuliane Schmüser, Philip Klostermeyer, Kay Friedrich, Sascha FahlS&P 2025
- The Challenges of Bringing Cryptography from Research Papers to Products: Results from an Interview Study with ExpertsKonstantin Fischer, Ivana Trummová, Phillip Gajland, Yasemin Acar et al.USENIX Security 2024 · 9 citations
- When Contracts Meets Crypto: Exploring Developers' Struggles with Ethereum Cryptographic APIsJiashuo Zhang, Jiachi Chen, Zhiyuan Wan, Ting Chen et al.ICSE 2024 · 9 citations
- Transparency in Usable Privacy and Security Research: Scholars' Perspectives, Practices, and RecommendationsJan H. Klemmer, Juliane Schmüser, Byron M. Lowens, Fabian Fischer et al.S&P 2025
- "These results must be false": A usability evaluation of constant-time analysis toolsMarcel Fourné, Daniel De Almeida Braga, Jan Jancar, Mohamed Sabt et al.USENIX Security 2024 · 15 citations
