lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2 04/12] crypto: chacha - add XChaCha12 support
Hi Ard,

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 10:34:41PM +0800, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/crypto/chacha.h b/include/crypto/chacha.h
> > index ae79e9983c72f..3d261f5cd156d 100644
> > --- a/include/crypto/chacha.h
> > +++ b/include/crypto/chacha.h
> > @@ -5,6 +5,11 @@
> > * XChaCha extends ChaCha's nonce to 192 bits, while provably retaining ChaCha's
> > * security. Here they share the same key size, tfm context, and setkey
> > * function; only their IV size and encrypt/decrypt function differ.
> > + *
> > + * The ChaCha paper specifies 20, 12, and 8-round variants. In general, it is
> > + * recommended to use the 20-round variant ChaCha20. However, the other
> > + * variants can be needed in some performance-sensitive scenarios. The generic
> > + * ChaCha code currently allows only the 20 and 12-round variants.
> > */
> >
> > #ifndef _CRYPTO_CHACHA_H
> > @@ -39,6 +44,8 @@ void crypto_chacha_init(u32 *state, struct chacha_ctx *ctx, u8 *iv);
> >
> > int crypto_chacha20_setkey(struct crypto_skcipher *tfm, const u8 *key,
> > unsigned int keysize);
> > +int crypto_chacha12_setkey(struct crypto_skcipher *tfm, const u8 *key,
> > + unsigned int keysize);
> >
> > int crypto_chacha_crypt(struct skcipher_request *req);
> > int crypto_xchacha_crypt(struct skcipher_request *req);
> > diff --git a/lib/chacha.c b/lib/chacha.c
> > index 0a2c2e5b7b84d..c4d69a83fcd2d 100644
> > --- a/lib/chacha.c
> > +++ b/lib/chacha.c
> > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ static void chacha_permute(u32 *x, int nrounds)
> > int i;
> >
> > /* whitelist the allowed round counts */
> > - BUG_ON(nrounds != 20);
> > + BUG_ON(nrounds != 20 && nrounds != 12);
> >
>
> I didn't spot this until this patch, but BUG_ON() may bring down the
> kernel, and so it should really only be used as a last resort. (i.e.,
> if this is called from non-process context things may explode rather
> painfully)
>
> I didn't look at the entire file [which is a bit cumbersome while
> reviewing incremental changes like this] and so I don't really have
> another suggestion right now, but please try to come up with something
> better if you can.
>

I'll change it to WARN_ON_ONCE(), I guess. I do still want it to be very noisy
if something fishy is going on with the round count.

- Eric

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-19 20:29    [W:0.095 / U:2.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site