linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] tpm: use SM3 instead of SM3

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: <c39fe737-203e-b124-db70-fce471ac6459@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 15:02:24 +0800
From:   Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     jejb@...ux.ibm.com, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] tpm: use SM3 instead of SM3_256

Hi James,

On 10/9/21 9:29 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-10-09 at 21:08 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>> According to https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-oscca-cfrg-sm3-01.html,
>> SM3 always produces a 256-bit hash value and there are no plans for
>> other length development, so there is no ambiguity in the name of
>> sm3.
> 
> For the TPM we're following the TPM Library specification
> 
> https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/resource/tpm-library-specification/
> 
> Which is very clear: the algorithm name is TPM_ALG_SM3_256
> 
> We're using sm3 as our exposed name because that's what linux crypto
> uses, so there should be no problem in what the end user sees, but
> changing to non standard TPM definitions is only going to cause
> confusion at the kernel level.
> 
> James
> 

Thanks for your attention. This is really tricky. I will contact 
trustedcomputinggroup first and give some suggestions, It would be best 
if a more standard algorithm name can be used from the source of the 
specification.

I think the macro definition of the crypto directory can remove this 
suffix first, that is, apply patch 1. What's your opinion?

Best regards,
Tianjia