linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 06/10] crypto: Add supplementary info param to asymmetric key signature verification

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: <1418295.1768952386@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 23:39:46 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
    Ignat Korchagin <ignat@...udflare.com>,
    Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
    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>, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
    keyrings@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
    linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
    "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 06/10] crypto: Add supplementary info param to asymmetric key signature verification

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:

> As I'm sure you're aware, C has native support for function parameters.

And we have a syscall interface to honour that takes a parameter string *for
this very purpose*.  It just wasn't threaded into the akcipher API.

> This is yet another example of a case where trying to fit different
> algorithms into a generic API doesn't work well.

Well enough.

> We should just have a library API for each signature algorithm, with
> each algorithm taking the parameters it needs.

No, we shouldn't.  We have a library that allows demand loadable modules.  We
should use that.

David