linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] crypto: AF_ALG -- add asymmetric cipher interface

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: <1759070.fi90mrsgKn@positron.chronox.de>
Date:	Tue, 14 Jun 2016 07:12:24 +0200
From:	Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de>
To:	Andrew Zaborowski <balrogg@...glemail.com>
Cc:	Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>,
	Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, marcel@...tmann.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] crypto: AF_ALG -- add asymmetric cipher interface

Am Dienstag, 14. Juni 2016, 00:16:11 schrieb Andrew Zaborowski:

Hi Andrew,

> Hi,
> 
> On 8 June 2016 at 21:14, Mat Martineau
> 
> <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> >> What is your concern?
> > 
> > Userspace must allocate larger buffers than it knows are necessary for
> > expected results.
> > 
> > It looks like the software rsa implementation handles shorter output
> > buffers ok (mpi_write_to_sgl will return EOVERFLOW if the the buffer is
> > too small), however I see at least one hardware rsa driver that requires
> > the output buffer to be the maximum size. But this inconsistency might be
> > best addressed within the software cipher or drivers rather than in
> > recvmsg.
> Should the hardware drivers fix this instead?  I've looked at the qat
> and caam drivers, they both require the destination buffer size to be
> the key size and in both cases there would be no penalty for dropping
> this requirement as far as I see.  Both do a memmove if the result
> ends up being shorter than key size.  In case the caller knows it is
> expecting a specific output size, the driver will have to use a self
> allocated buffer + a memcpy in those same cases where it would later
> use memmove instead.  Alternatively the sg passed to dma_map_sg can be
> prepended with a dummy segment the right size to save the memcpy.
> 
> akcipher.h only says:
> @dst_len: Size of the output buffer. It needs to be at least as big as
> the expected result depending on the operation
> 
> Note that for random input data the memmove will be done about 1 in
> 256 times but with PKCS#1 padding the signature always has a leading
> zero.
> 
> Requiring buffers bigger than needed makes the added work of dropping
> the zero bytes from the sglist and potentially re-adding them in the
> client difficult to justify.  RSA doing this sets a precedent for a
> future pkcs1pad (or other algorithm) implementation to do the same
> thing and a portable client having to always know the key size and use
> key-sized buffers.

I think we have agreed on dropping the length enforcement at the interface 
level.

Ciao
Stephan