netdev - Re: [PATCH] xfrm: Don't allow esn with disabled anti replay detection

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

Message-Id: <20110510.122819.48494581.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 10 May 2011 12:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	steffen.klassert@...unet.com
Cc:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfrm: Don't allow esn with disabled anti replay
 detection

From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 07:43:05 +0200

> Unlike the standard case, disabled anti replay detection needs some
> nontrivial extra treatment on ESN. RFC 4303 states:
> 
> Note: If a receiver chooses to not enable anti-replay for an SA, then
> the receiver SHOULD NOT negotiate ESN in an SA management protocol.
> Use of ESN creates a need for the receiver to manage the anti-replay
> window (in order to determine the correct value for the high-order
> bits of the ESN, which are employed in the ICV computation), which is
> generally contrary to the notion of disabling anti-replay for an SA.
> 
> So return an error if an ESN state with disabled anti replay detection
> is inserted for now and add the extra treatment later if we need it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>

Also applied, thanks for fixing these bugs!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html