[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1f65ce09-93b3-f43e-49d5-9d9d6c0bb9e0@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2018 12:26:20 +0200
From: Milan Broz <gmazyland@...il.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@...gle.com>,
Greg Kaiser <gkaiser@...gle.com>,
Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@...gle.com>,
Samuel Neves <samuel.c.p.neves@...il.com>,
Tomer Ashur <tomer.ashur@...t.kuleuven.be>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/12] crypto: Adiantum support
On 19/10/2018 21:04, Eric Biggers wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 05:58:35PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> Hello Eric,
>>
>>> As before, some of these patches conflict with the new "Zinc" crypto
>>> library. But I don't know when Zinc will be merged, so for now I've
>>> continued to base this patchset on the current 'cryptodev'.
>>
>> I'd appreciate it if you waited to merge this until you can rebase it
>> on top of Zinc. In fact, if you already want to build it on top of
>> Zinc, I'm happy to work with you on that in a shared repo or similar.
>> We can also hash out the details of that in person in Vancouver in a
>> few weeks. I think pushing this in before will create undesirable
>> churn for both of us.
>>
>
> I won't be at Plumbers, sorry! For if/when it's needed, I'll start a version of
> this based on Zinc. The basic requirements are that we need (1) xchacha12 and
> xchacha20 available as 'skciphers' in the crypto API, and (2) the poly1305_core
> functions (see patch 08/12). In principle, these can be implemented in Zinc.
> The Adiantum template and all the NHPoly1305 stuff will be the same either way.
> (Unless you'll want one or both of those moved to Zinc too. To be honest, even
> after your explanations I still don't have a clear idea of what is supposed to
> go in Zinc and what isn't...)
>
> However, for now I'm hesitant to completely abandon the current approach and bet
> the farm on Zinc. Zinc has a large scope and various controversies that haven't
> yet been fully resolved to everyone's satisfaction, including unclear licenses
> on some of the essential assembly files. It's not appropriate to grind kernel
> crypto development to grind a halt while everyone waits for Zinc.
>
> So if Zinc is ready, then it makes sense for it to go first;
> otherwise, it doesn't. It's not yet clear which is the case.
Does it mean, that if Adiantum is based on Zinc, it can be no longer used
for FDE (dm-crypt)? IOW only file-based encryption is possible?
Adiantum (as in your current git branches on kernel.org) can be used for dm-crypt
without any changes (yes, I played with it :) and with some easy tricks directly
through cryptsetup/LUKS as well.
I think we should have this as an alternative to length-preserving wide-block
cipher modes for FDE.
Milan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists