linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add Hygon SEV support

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: <fda47663-9536-0d36-5a0e-c6da77e21209@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Apr 2019 18:04:46 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Pascal Van Leeuwen <pvanleeuwen@...idesecure.com>,
        Hao Feng <fenghao@...on.cn>,
        'Tom Lendacky ' <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        'Gary Hook ' <gary.hook@....com>,
        'Herbert Xu ' <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "' David S. Miller '" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        'Janakarajan Natarajan ' <Janakarajan.Natarajan@....com>,
        'Joerg Roedel ' <joro@...tes.org>,
        ' Radim Krčmář ' <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        'Thomas Gleixner ' <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        'Ingo Molnar ' <mingo@...hat.com>,
        'Borislav Petkov ' <bp@...en8.de>,
        "' H. Peter Anvin '" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:     'Zhaohui Du ' <duzhaohui@...on.cn>,
        'Zhiwei Ying ' <yingzhiwei@...on.cn>,
        'Wen Pu ' <puwen@...on.cn>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add Hygon SEV support

On 15/04/19 17:51, Pascal Van Leeuwen wrote:
> I don't know about SM2, but both SM3 and SM4 are already implemented in
> the kernel tree as generic C code and covered by the testmgr.

I stand corrected.

> There also has been quite some analysis done on them (Google is your
> friend) and they are generally considered secure.

Good.

> Besides that, they are
> in heavy practical use in mainland China, usually as direct replacements
> for SHA2-256 and AES in whatever protocol or use case you need: IPsec,
> TLS, WPA2, XTS for disk encryption, you name it.

How should that mean anything?

>> Because as far as I know, they could be just as secure as double rot13.
> 
> You could educate yourself first instead of just making assumptions?
I did educate myself a bit, but I'm not an expert in cryptography, so I
would like to be sure that these are not another Speck or DUAL-EC-DRBG.
 "SM2 is based on ECC(Elliptic Curve Cryptography), and uses a special
curve" is enough for me to see warning signs, at least without further
explanations, and so does the fact that the initial SM3 values were
changed from SHA-2 and AFAICT there is no public justification for that.

Paolo