linux-kernel - IMA and PQC

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1783975.1769190197@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 17:43:17 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Simo Sorce <simo@...hat.com>,
    Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
    Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
    Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>,
    Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
    linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
    linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: IMA and PQC

Hi Mimi,

I've posted patches which I hope will accepted to implement ML-DSA module
signing:

	https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/1753972.1769166821@warthog.procyon.org.uk/T/#t

but for the moment, it will give an error to pkcs7_get_digest() if there's no
digest available (which there won't be with ML-DSA).  This means that there
isn't a hash for IMA to get at for TPM measurement.

Now, I probably have to make a SHA256 hash anyway for UEFI blacklisting
purposes, so that could be used.  Alternatively, we can require the use of
authenticatedAttributes/signedAttrs and give you the hash of that - but then
you're a bit at the mercy of whatever hashes were used.

Further, we need to think how we're going to do PQC support in IMA -
particularly as the signatures are so much bigger and verification slower.

Would ML-DSA-44 be acceptable?  Should we grab some internal state out of
ML-DSA to use in lieu of a hash?

David