| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <12222.1431529435@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 16:03:55 +0100 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org, jwboyer@...hat.com, richard@....at, steved@...hat.com, qat-linux@...el.com, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, james.l.morris@...cle.com, jkosina@...e.cz, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net, vgoyal@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] crypto: add PKE API Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote: > > What if the fallback doesn't exist? For instance, a H/W contained key is > > specifically limited to, say, just sign/verify and the not permitted to be > > used for encrypt/decrypt. How do you provide a fallback given you can't get > > at the key? > > That's a transform with a specific key. I don't see why such a > piece of hardware would even need to be exposed through the crypto > API which is about generic implementations that can take any > arbitrary key. So what if we want to use a key that's stored in a TPM? I presume then we can't use the crypto interface, but must rather use the *key* as the primary interface somehow. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists