netdev - RE: [PATCH v2 3/4] secure_seq: use siphash24 instead of md5

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]

Date:   Wed, 14 Dec 2016 14:47:11 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     "'Jason A. Donenfeld'" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
CC:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 3/4] secure_seq: use siphash24 instead of
 md5_transform

From: Jason A. Donenfeld
> Sent: 14 December 2016 13:44
> To: Hannes Frederic Sowa
> > __packed not only removes all padding of the struct but also changes the
> > alignment assumptions for the whole struct itself. The rule, the struct
> > is aligned by its maximum alignment of a member is no longer true. That
> > said, the code accessing this struct will change (not on archs that can
> > deal efficiently with unaligned access, but on others).
> 
> That's interesting. There currently aren't any alignment requirements
> in siphash because we use the unaligned helper functions, but as David
> pointed out in another thread, maybe that too should change. In that
> case, we'd have an aligned-only version of the function that requires
> 8-byte aligned input. Perhaps the best way to go about that would be
> to just mark the struct as __packed __aligned(8). Or, I guess, since
> 64-bit accesses gets split into two on 32-bit, that'd be best descried
> as __packed __aligned(sizeof(long)). Would that be an acceptable
> solution?

Just remove the __packed and ensure that the structure is 'nice'.
This includes ensuring there is no 'tail padding'.
In some cases you'll need to put the port number into a 32bit field.

I'd also require that the key be aligned.
It probably ought to be a named structure type with two 64bit members
(or with an array member that has two elements).

	David