netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] kernel TLS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 14 Jun 2017 16:24:53 -0700
From:   Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
To:     Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>
Cc:     Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>,
        Aviad Yehezkel <aviadye@...lanox.com>,
        Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>,
        Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>,
        Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        nmav@...tls.org,
        Fridolín Pokorný <fridolin.pokorny@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] kernel TLS

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com> wrote:
> On 06/14/17 01:54 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com> wrote:
>> > This series adds support for kernel TLS encryption over TCP sockets.
>> > A standard TCP socket is converted to a TLS socket using a setsockopt.
>> > Only symmetric crypto is done in the kernel, as well as TLS record
>> > framing.  The handshake remains in userspace, and the negotiated
>> > cipher keys/iv are provided to the TCP socket.
>> >
>> I don't see support for TLS receive path in the kernel, only the send
>> path. Am I missing something?
>
> Correct, this is only TX.  Since it sounds likely some hardware might
> only be able to offload TX, we decided to configure TX and RX
> separately.  Using the OpenSSL patches, it should be transparent to
> users even if only one side is offloaded.
>
> The software RX patches exist but haven't been polished up yet.

Thanks for the clarification, looking forward to RX patches also!

Tom