linux-hardening - Re: memset() in crypto code

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]

Message-ID: <YTG9fAQTha7ZP/kh@kroah.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Sep 2021 08:15:24 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Sandy Harris <sandyinchina@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: memset() in crypto code

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 09:13:43AM +0800, Sandy Harris wrote:
> Doing this the crypto directory:
> grep memset *.c | wc -l
> I get 137 results.
> 
> The compiler may optimise memset() away, subverting the intent of
> these operations. We have memzero_explicit() to avoid that problem.
> 
> Should most or all those memset() calls be replaced?

The ones that are determined to actually need this, sure, but a simple
grep like that does not actually show that.  You need to read the code
itself to determine the need or not, please do so.

good luck!

greg k-h