netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/handshake: Add new parameter 'HANDSHAKE_A_ACCEPT

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: <59259094-7eb8-42ce-aebb-c5b286a4f31b@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 12:12:02 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel-tls-handshake@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/handshake: Add new parameter
 'HANDSHAKE_A_ACCEPT_KEYRING'

On 7/3/25 2:55 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On 7/3/25 3:10 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> On 7/2/25 22:59, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Tue,  1 Jul 2025 16:46:57 +0200 Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>>> Add a new netlink parameter 'HANDSHAKE_A_ACCEPT_KEYRING' to provide
>>>> the serial number of the keyring to use.
>>>
>>> I presume you may have some dependent work for other trees?
>>> If yes - could you pop this on a branch off an -rc tag so
>>> that multiple trees can merge? Or do you want us to ack
>>> and route it via different tree directly?
>>>
>>> Acked-by:  Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>>>
>> We are good from the NVMe side; we already set the 'keyring'
>> parameter in the handshake arguments, but only found out now
>> that we never actually pass this argument over to userspace...
>> But maybe the NFS folks have addiional patches queued.
>> Chuck?
> 
> Currently .keyring is used only with NVMe. I recall that hch has plans
> to make the mount.nfs command set .keyring as well. However, nothing is
> queued yet, as far as I know.

I read the above as we are good to apply this to net-next right now...

/P