[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251117201233.GA3993@sol>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 12:12:33 -0800
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
"Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
Ignat Korchagin <ignat@...udflare.com>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/9] crypto: Add ML-DSA/Dilithium verify support
On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 07:52:55PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > In comparison, BoringSSL has an entire implementation of ML-DSA, ...
>
> ... which cannot be used in the kernel due to the licence.
>
> David
First, BoringSSL's license changed to Apache only recently. An older
version of the code is available under a BSD style license.
Second, even with the new license I can get permission to relicense it
if needed.
Third, regardless of license BoringSSL's code can't be reused directly
in the kernel anyway, for various reasons. My point is that a smaller,
cleaner, and more maintainable implementation of ML-DSA is possible, and
your submission misses the mark.
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists