linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] zcrypt: handle AP Info notification from CHSC SEI command

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]

Date:   Mon, 4 Feb 2019 13:07:18 +0100
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To:     Harald Freudenberger <freude@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, sebott@...ux.ibm.com,
        oberpar@...ux.ibm.com, pmorel@...ux.ibm.com, pasic@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zcrypt: handle AP Info notification from CHSC SEI
 command

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 11:15:25 +0100
Harald Freudenberger <freude@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 01.02.19 15:35, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 18:50:57 -0500
> > Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> On 1/31/19 4:55 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:  
> >>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:48:46 -0500
> >>> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>> Two questions:
> >>> - Does the event cover _any_ change to the AP configuration, or can the
> >>>    periodic scan detect changes that are not signaled?    
> >> It can detect any change, such as a change to the CRYCB masks.  
> > Nice. I suppose we can not rely on those messages being generated,
> > though, and therefore need to keep the periodic scan...  
> As you wrote, I am not sure if the ap bus code can rely on this to
> cover all changes. For kvm guests I think it is currently not working
> as there is no such notification generated at all. So I'd like to
> have the periodic scan in place.

Yes, and there are bound to be QEMU versions without that support in
active use even if this is implemented in the future. But a quicker
reaction to changes on real hardware still sounds like a win to me :)