netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] crypto: Remove unnecessary memzero

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]

Message-ID: <e194a51f-a5e5-a557-c008-b08cac558572@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:24:36 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, linux-ppp@...r.kernel.org,
        wireguard@...ts.zx2c4.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        target-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
        linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, ecryptfs@...r.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] crypto: Remove unnecessary memzero_explicit()

On 4/14/20 2:08 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 14/04/2020 à 00:28, Waiman Long a écrit :
>> Since kfree_sensitive() will do an implicit memzero_explicit(), there
>> is no need to call memzero_explicit() before it. Eliminate those
>> memzero_explicit() and simplify the call sites. For better correctness,
>> the setting of keylen is also moved down after the key pointer check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>   .../allwinner/sun8i-ce/sun8i-ce-cipher.c      | 19 +++++-------------
>>   .../allwinner/sun8i-ss/sun8i-ss-cipher.c      | 20 +++++--------------
>>   drivers/crypto/amlogic/amlogic-gxl-cipher.c   | 12 +++--------
>>   drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c  |  3 +--
>>   4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/allwinner/sun8i-ce/sun8i-ce-cipher.c
>> b/drivers/crypto/allwinner/sun8i-ce/sun8i-ce-cipher.c
>> index aa4e8fdc2b32..8358fac98719 100644
>> --- a/drivers/crypto/allwinner/sun8i-ce/sun8i-ce-cipher.c
>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/allwinner/sun8i-ce/sun8i-ce-cipher.c
>> @@ -366,10 +366,7 @@ void sun8i_ce_cipher_exit(struct crypto_tfm *tfm)
>>   {
>>       struct sun8i_cipher_tfm_ctx *op = crypto_tfm_ctx(tfm);
>>   -    if (op->key) {
>> -        memzero_explicit(op->key, op->keylen);
>> -        kfree(op->key);
>> -    }
>> +    kfree_sensitive(op->key);
>>       crypto_free_sync_skcipher(op->fallback_tfm);
>>       pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend(op->ce->dev);
>>   }
>> @@ -391,14 +388,11 @@ int sun8i_ce_aes_setkey(struct crypto_skcipher
>> *tfm, const u8 *key,
>>           dev_dbg(ce->dev, "ERROR: Invalid keylen %u\n", keylen);
>>           return -EINVAL;
>>       }
>> -    if (op->key) {
>> -        memzero_explicit(op->key, op->keylen);
>> -        kfree(op->key);
>> -    }
>> -    op->keylen = keylen;
>> +    kfree_sensitive(op->key);
>>       op->key = kmemdup(key, keylen, GFP_KERNEL | GFP_DMA);
>>       if (!op->key)
>>           return -ENOMEM;
>> +    op->keylen = keylen;
>
> Does it matter at all to ensure op->keylen is not set when of->key is
> NULL ? I'm not sure.
>
> But if it does, then op->keylen should be set to 0 when freeing op->key. 

My thinking is that if memory allocation fails, we just don't touch
anything and return an error code. I will not explicitly set keylen to 0
in this case unless it is specified in the API documentation.

Cheers,
Longman