linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] crypto: sun4i-ss: handle BigEndian for cipher

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:   Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:06:58 +0200
From:   LABBE Corentin <clabbe@...libre.com>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:     arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, mripard@...nel.org,
        wens@...e.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] crypto: sun4i-ss: handle BigEndian for cipher

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 05:31:28PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 06:35:55PM +0000, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> > Ciphers produce invalid results on BE.
> > Key and IV need to be written in LE.
> > Furthermore, the non-optimized function is too complicated to convert,
> > let's simply fallback on BE for the moment.
> > 
> > Fixes: 6298e948215f2 ("crypto: sunxi-ss - Add Allwinner Security System crypto accelerator")
> > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <clabbe@...libre.com>
> > ---
> >  .../crypto/allwinner/sun4i-ss/sun4i-ss-cipher.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> Does the BE failure get caught by the selftest?
> 

Yes, selftest found it.

> If so please just leave it enabled so that it can be fixed properly.

Not sure to leave it enabled is a good idea.
A least, leaving it failing probably will not annoy any user (according to my readings of #linux-sunxi, nobody use BE).

But I think only me will see it and since I already have this on my TODO list, I dont see any interest to leave it failing.
Furthermore, having a clean BE boot will permit to enable BE boots for thoses SoCs on kernelCI.

Regards