linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] 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: <CAMj1kXGiC-LCc-50cfddJxJ-mezO=fcLqhJHiK110CgxKusy9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:08:10 +0200
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To:     Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     James Bottomley <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 <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] use SM3 instead of SM3_256

On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 09:56, Tianjia Zhang
<tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com> 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.
>

What is the point of these changes? Having '256' in the identifiers is
merely redundant and not factually incorrect, so why can't we just
leave these as they are?




> ---
> v3 changes:
>  - The fix of document trusted-encrypted.rst is put in patch 2
>
> v2 changes:
>  - an additional macro with the same value is defined for uapi instead
>    of renaming directly
>
> Tianjia Zhang (2):
>   crypto: use SM3 instead of SM3_256
>   tpm: use SM3 instead of SM3_256
>
>  Documentation/security/keys/trusted-encrypted.rst | 2 +-
>  crypto/hash_info.c                                | 4 ++--
>  drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.c                      | 4 ++--
>  drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c                       | 2 +-
>  include/crypto/hash_info.h                        | 2 +-
>  include/linux/tpm.h                               | 2 +-
>  include/uapi/linux/hash_info.h                    | 3 ++-
>  security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_tpm2.c         | 2 +-
>  8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.19.1.3.ge56e4f7
>