linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] crypto: move curve_id of ECDH from the key to algorithm name

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4f16302b-7002-fd96-f08c-245f49e3233c@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:19:08 +0800
From:   yumeng <yumeng18@...wei.com>
To:     <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>, <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        <johan.hedberg@...il.com>, <luiz.dentz@...il.com>
CC:     <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, <xuzaibo@...wei.com>,
        <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] crypto: move curve_id of ECDH from the key to
 algorithm name



在 2021/2/23 18:44, Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com 写道:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2/23/21 9:10 AM, Meng Yu wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/crypto/atmel-ecc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/atmel-ecc.c
>> @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ static int atmel_ecdh_set_secret(struct crypto_kpp *tfm, const void *buf,
>>                  return -EINVAL;
>>          }
>>
>> -       ctx->n_sz = atmel_ecdh_supported_curve(params.curve_id);
>> +       ctx->n_sz = atmel_ecdh_supported_curve(ctx->curve_id);
>>          if (!ctx->n_sz || params.key_size) {
>>                  /* fallback to ecdh software implementation */
>>                  ctx->do_fallback = true;
> 
> Now that you moved the curve id info into the alg name, and it is
> no longer dynamically discovered when decoding the key, does it
> still make sense to keep the curve id, the key size checks, and
> the fallback to the software implementation?
> 
Yes, I think we can keep this code if 'atmel-ecc' may support
new other curves at future, and if you're sure P256 is the only curve 
'atmel-ecc' uses, and it will never be changed, we can delete it.

> I don't have an atecc508 at hand to test the changes, but I expect
> your changes won't affect the functionality.
> 
OK, when you or your team members have an atecc508, please help test.