netdev - Re: [RFCv2 1/9] tcp: authopt: Initial support and key management

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: <8d656f85-6f66-6c40-c4af-b05c6639b9ab@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 07:42:17 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@...il.com>,
        Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.co.jp>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@...sta.com>,
        Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>,
        Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@...le.com>,
        Ivan Delalande <colona@...sta.com>,
        Priyaranjan Jha <priyarjha@...gle.com>,
        Menglong Dong <dong.menglong@....com.cn>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 1/9] tcp: authopt: Initial support and key management

On 8/11/21 2:29 AM, Leonard Crestez wrote:
> On 8/10/21 11:41 PM, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>> Hi Leonard,
>>
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 02:50, Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@...il.com>
>> wrote:
>> [..]
>>> +/* Representation of a Master Key Tuple as per RFC5925 */
>>> +struct tcp_authopt_key_info {
>>> +       struct hlist_node node;
>>> +       /* Local identifier */
>>> +       u32 local_id;
>>
>> There is no local_id in RFC5925, what's that?
>> An MKT is identified by (send_id, recv_id), together with
>> (src_addr/src_port, dst_addr/dst_port).
>> Why introducing something new to already complicated RFC?
> 
> It was there to simplify user interface and initial implementation.
> 
> But it seems that BGP listeners already needs to support multiple
> keychains for different peers so identifying the key by (send_id,
> recv_id, binding) is easier for userspace to work with. Otherwise they
> need to create their own local_id mapping internally.
> 

any proposed simplification needs to be well explained and how it
relates to the RFC spec.