[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9qmDEk-aPYH2CA+q0G7rYfUt6W_WijAgusPVYe48OzwdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:53:10 +0200
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>,
Jean-Philippe Aumasson <jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 02/17] zinc: introduce minimal cryptography library
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 8:15 AM Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
> OK, so given random.c's future dependency on Zinc (for ChaCha20), and
> the fact that Zinc is one monolithic piece of code, all versions of
> all algorithms will always be statically linked into the kernel
> proper. I'm not sure that is acceptable.
v4 already addresses that issue, actually. I'll post it shortly.
> BTW you haven't answered my question yet about what happens when the
> WireGuard protocol version changes: will we need a flag day and switch
> all deployments over at the same time?
No, that won't be necessary, necessarily. Peers are individually
versioned and the protocol is fairly flexible in this regard.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists