| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:08:59 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> To: Francis Moreau <francis.moro@...il.com> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, helge.hafting@...el.hist.no, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [CRYPTO] is it really optimized ? On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:01:51PM +0200, Francis Moreau (francis.moro@...il.com) wrote: > On 4/17/07, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote: > > > >Yep. We don't need such a flag anyway. All we need is a way to tweak > >the priority and Bob's your uncle. > > > > Could you elaborate please, I don't see how you prevent others users > to use this module with priority. > > Priority is a stuff that tells you which aes implementation to use but > it does not prevent an implementation to be used several times... Preventing anyone from using the module is incorrect. How will you handle the case when you have only one algo registered and it will be exclusively used by ecryptfs? Herbert proposes to register _second_ algo (say aes-generic(prio_100) and aes_for_ecryptfs(prio_1)) with lower prio, so generic access will never try to catch aes_for_ecryptfs, but your code still can access it using full name. > Thanks > -- > Francis -- Evgeniy Polyakov - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists