On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 03:52:19PM +0300, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>
> I'm replacing a per-tfm shared secret with a per-request dynamically
> allocated shared secret. The same for the public key, I'm replacing
> a per-tfm public key with a per-request dynamically allocated public
> key. No shared
Hi, Herbert,
On 07/18/2017 08:50 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 05:08:35PM +0300, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
ecdh_ctx contained static allocated data for the shared secret,
for the public and private key.
When talking about shared secret and public key, they were
doomed to
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 05:08:35PM +0300, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
> ecdh_ctx contained static allocated data for the shared secret,
> for the public and private key.
>
> When talking about shared secret and public key, they were
> doomed to concurrency issues because they could be shared by
>
ecdh_ctx contained static allocated data for the shared secret,
for the public and private key.
When talking about shared secret and public key, they were
doomed to concurrency issues because they could be shared by
multiple crypto requests. The requests were generating specific
data to the same
