netdev - Re: [RFC / RFT net 0/7] tls: rx: strp: fix inline crypto offload

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 18:52:00 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 drort@...dia.com, samiram@...dia.com, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC / RFT net 0/7] tls: rx: strp: fix inline crypto offload

On Tue, 16 May 2023 15:27:51 +0300 Tariq Toukan wrote:
> Here's an updated testing status:
> 
> 1. Reported issue is resolved.
> 2. All device-offload TLS RX/TX tests passed, except for the one issue 
> below.
> 
> Nothing indicates that this issue is new or related directly to your 
> fixes series. It might have been there for some time, hiding behind the 
> existing bugs.
> 
> Issue description:
> TlsDecryptError / TlsEncryptError increase when simultaneously creating 
> a bond interface.
> It doesn't happen each and every time. It reproduced several times in 
> different runs.
> The strange part is that the bond is created and attached to a different 
> interface, not the one running the TLS traffic!

Hm, that's pretty odd / scary. LMK if you hit a dead end, I hope 
it's not a memory corruption :S

> I think we should progress with the fixes:
> Tested-by: Shai Amiram <samiram@...dia.com>

Thanks!