Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:58:35PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > Note that Linux > > doesn't bow down to any particular standards organization, and it offers > > algorithms that were specified in various places, even some with no more > > than a > > publication by the author. In fact,

RE: [PATCH V8 1/5] crypto: Multi-buffer encryption infrastructure support

>-Original Message- >From: Herbert Xu [mailto:herb...@gondor.apana.org.au] >Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 8:25 PM >To: Dey, Megha >Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org; >da...@davemloft.net >Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 1/5] crypto:

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

Hi Jason, On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:58:35PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: > > So, what do you propose replacing it with? > > Something more cryptographically justifiable. > It's easy to say that, but

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Can we please not Speck? > > It was just rejected by the ISO/IEC. > > https://twitter.com/TomerAshur/status/988659711091228673 Yeah, but here was the reason given

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 at 13:58, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: > > So, what do you propose replacing it with? > Something more cryptographically justifiable. I'm keen to hear recommendations here, if there

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

Hi Eric, On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Eric Biggers wrote: > So, what do you propose replacing it with? Something more cryptographically justifiable. > outside crypto review, vs. the many cryptanalysis papers on Speck. (In that > respect the controversy about Speck has

Re: [PATCH] crypto: remove Speck

Hi Jason, On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 06:18:26PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > This NSA-designed cipher was rejected for inclusion in international > standards by ISO/IEC. Before anyone actually starts using it by > accident, let's just not ship it at all. > > Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

Hi Jason, On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 06:11:26PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Can we please not Speck? > > It was just rejected by the ISO/IEC. > > https://twitter.com/TomerAshur/status/988659711091228673 So, what do you propose replacing it with? As I explained in the patch, the purpose of

Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] crypto: caam - allow retrieving 'era' from register

Hi Herbert, On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 1:39 PM, Herbert Xu wrote: > As this is a new device support issue I'd prefer to delay this > until the next merge window. Understood. I will send a patch that passes ''fsl,sec-era' property in the dts, so that we can have CAAM

Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] crypto: caam - allow retrieving 'era' from register

Hi Fabio: On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 03:21:47PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > It is not a regression. > > We haven't seen this problem before because dtsi files passed the > 'fsl,sec-era' property. > > Since 4.17-rc1, imx7 supports CAAM: > 0eeabcad7da5 ("ARM: dts: imx7s: add CAAM device node")

Re: Question on random.c add_interrupt_randomness function

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 03:24:55PM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote: > The condition is true and terminates the function > when the count value of the cpu fast pool is below 64 > AND the time since last mix of the pool is lower than > HZ (so lower than 1s). > This means the code following this

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: Speck support

Can we please not Speck? It was just rejected by the ISO/IEC. https://twitter.com/TomerAshur/status/988659711091228673

[PATCH] crypto: remove Speck

This NSA-designed cipher was rejected for inclusion in international standards by ISO/IEC. Before anyone actually starts using it by accident, let's just not ship it at all. Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld --- arch/arm/crypto/Kconfig |6 -

Re: [PATCH] crypto: ccree: limit build to plausible archs

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > My underlying idea is not to cut down build time for test code (that's what > we have COMPILE_TEST for), but to enhance usability for users and distros, > who need to know if it makes sense to enable an option.

Question on random.c add_interrupt_randomness function

Hello Theodore, I am currently investigating a better implementation of the arch_get_random_long_seed() implementation for s390. And so I stumbled over the function add_interrupt_randomness() in random.c and have one question regarding this code: void add_interrupt_randomness(int irq, int

Re: [PATCH] crypto: ccree: limit build to plausible archs

Hi Gilad, On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:53 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven > wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:13

Re: [PATCH] crypto: ccree: limit build to plausible archs

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:53 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Gilad, > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 1:48