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: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 08:00:25 -0800 From: Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com> To: Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de> Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Hi Stephan, On 01/27/2016 10:26 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote: >> + for (i = 0; i < areq->tsgls; i++) >> > + put_page(sg_page(sg + i)); > Shouldn't here be the same logic as in put_sgl? I.e. > > for (i = 0; i < sgl->cur; i++) { > if (!sg_page(sg + i)) > continue; > > put_page(sg_page(sg + i)); > sg_assign_page(sg + i, NULL); > } > Thanks for reviewing. I don't think it is possible that there ever will be any gaps in the tsgl. In fact if there is such a possibility then it is a serious problem, because it would mean that we are sending NULL ptrs to the ciphers (see line 640): sg_mark_end(sgl->sg + sgl->cur - 1); aead_request_set_crypt(&ctx->aead_req, sgl->sg, ctx->first_rsgl.sgl.sg, used, ctx->iv); I don't see any implementation checking for null in sgls. Most of them just do: for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nents, i) sg_virt(sg)... So it would Oops there. I think this check in put_sgl is redundant. Thanks, -- TS
Powered by blists - more mailing lists