[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+ti_nzxeu64e-X+igNEsnXiW1rjkn7R63DMBCxBOeTNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 09:46:17 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>,
Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
Arnaud Ebalard <arno@...isbad.org>,
Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...il.com>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] crypto: skcipher - Enforce non-ASYNC for on-stack requests
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Herbert Xu
<herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 08:56:23AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> OK, so given that all SKCIPHER_REQUEST_ON_STACK occurrences are
>> updated in this series anyway, perhaps we should add
>> skcipher_[en|de]crypt_onstack() flavors that encapsulate the
>> additional check? Only question is how to enforce at compile time that
>> those are used instead of the ordinary ones when using a stack
>> allocated request. Would you mind using some macro foo here involving
>> __builtin_types_compatible_p() ?
>
> Something like a completely new type which in reality is just a
> wrapper around skcipher:
>
> struct crypto_sync_skcipher {
> struct crypto_skcipher base;
> } tfm;
>
> tfm = crypto_alloc_sync_skcipher(...);
>
> crypto_sync_skcipher_encrypt(...)
> crypto_sync_skcipher_decrypt(...)
>
> These functions would just be trivial inline functions around their
> crypto_skcipher counterparts.
This means new wrappers for the other helpers too, yes? For example:
SKCIPHER_REQUEST_ON_STACK(nreq, ctx->null);
skcipher_request_set_tfm(nreq, ctx->null);
skcipher_request_set_callback(nreq, req->base.flags, NULL, NULL);
skcipher_request_set_crypt(nreq, req->src, req->dst, nbytes, NULL);
return crypto_skcipher_encrypt(nreq);
For the above, we'd also need:
sync_skcipher_request_set_tfm()
sync_skcipher_request_set_callback()
sync_skcipher_request_set_crypt()
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists