netdev - Re: [PATCH] mac80211: aes_ccm: move struct aead

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 14 Oct 2016 14:13:08 +0100
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        "<netdev@...r.kernel.org>" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jouni Malinen <j@...fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: aes_ccm: move struct aead_req off the stack

On 14 October 2016 at 14:10, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
>
>> So use kzalloc
>
> Do we really need kzalloc()? We have things on the stack right now, and
> don't initialize, so surely we don't really need to zero things?
>
>> This only addresses one half of the problem. The other problem, i.e.,
>> the fact that the aad[] array lives on the stack of the caller, is
>> handled adequately imo by the change proposed by Johannes.
>
> But if we allocate things anyway, is it worth expending per-CPU buffers
> on these?
>

Ehmm, maybe not. I could spin a v2 that allocates a bigger buffer, and
copies aad[] into it as well
That does not help the other algos though