linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/21] KEYS: PGP-based public key signature verification [ver #3]

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: <CALLzPKb6v-F-Hh+TAifQyABb3TrSRy5Th8kc-3W48pykEoTc-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:34:48 +0200
From:	"Kasatkin, Dmitry" <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	keyrings@...ux-nfs.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com, alan.cox@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/21] KEYS: PGP-based public key signature verification
 [ver #3]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:49 PM, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Kasatkin, Dmitry <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> Synchronous hash SHASH is used only for software hash implementation...
>> HW acceleration is not supported by this hash.
>> It is good for short data.
>> But when calculating a hash over long data as files can be,
>> async hash AHASH is a preferred choice as enables HW acceleration.
>
> Indeed.  The asynchronous hash is a pain to use in the kernel, though, for a
> couple of reasons: kernel addresses don't necessarily correspond to addresses
> the h/w accel will see and you have to handle the h/w not signalling
> completion.  Herbert created shash to make it easier, and for module signing,
> they're perfectly sufficient.
>

Well, from client side, API is not that more complicate.
It is just about scatterlist. Rest is handled by particular driver/HW.

I agree, modules are not that big and SHASH is perfect choice for that...

>> As in my response to [PATCH 08/21] KEYS: Add signature verification facility
>> [ver #3] It would be nice to have API to pass pre-computed hash, then client
>> might tackle async peculiarities by itself...
>
> True.  If you can give me the completed hash data, then I don't need to care
> how you managed it.  If you give me an uncompleted hash, I then have to deal
> with the async hash in the kernel.
>
> It might make sense for me to provide an API call to give you the postamble you
> need to add to the hash to complete it.  That call could also indicate which
> hash you require and could also be combined with the call to find the
> appropriate key.
>

Indeed, some blob with metadata to update before closing the hash
would work well.

PS.. As I understand, it is PGP spec which requires such processing.
Otherwise, plain data hash could be used to produce another hash for signing,
similar to what has been done in digsig project.... I have used the
same approach for IMA.

Thanks!

> David
--
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/