All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] dh key: get rid of stack allocated array for zeroes
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 21:13:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180424031324.GA3125@cisco> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180424010321.14739-3-tycho@tycho.ws>

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 07:03:21PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> We're interested in getting rid of all of the stack allocated arrays in
> the kernel: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621
> 
> This case is interesting, since we really just need an array of bytes that
> are zero. The loop already ensures that if the array isn't exactly the
> right size that enough zero bytes will be copied in. So, instead of
> choosing this value to be the size of the hash, let's just choose it to be
> 256, since that is a common size, is not to big, and will not result in too
> many extra iterations of the loop.
> 
> v2: split out from other patch, just hardcode array size instead of
>     dynamically allocating something the right size
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
> CC: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> CC: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
> CC: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
> CC: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
> ---
>  security/keys/dh.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/keys/dh.c b/security/keys/dh.c
> index 9fecaea6c298..74f8a853872e 100644
> --- a/security/keys/dh.c
> +++ b/security/keys/dh.c
> @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ static int kdf_ctr(struct kdf_sdesc *sdesc, const u8 *src, unsigned int slen,
>  			goto err;
>  
>  		if (zlen && h) {
> -			u8 tmpbuffer[h];
> -			size_t chunk = min_t(size_t, zlen, h);
> +			u8 tmpbuffer[256];

Whoops, this should be 32, not 256. That shouldn't make any runtime
difference, but it'll closer match the allocation patterns from
before.

I'll let this sit for a bit and send v3.

Tycho

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] dh key: get rid of stack allocated array for zeroes
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 03:13:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180424031324.GA3125@cisco> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180424010321.14739-3-tycho@tycho.ws>

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 07:03:21PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> We're interested in getting rid of all of the stack allocated arrays in
> the kernel: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621
> 
> This case is interesting, since we really just need an array of bytes that
> are zero. The loop already ensures that if the array isn't exactly the
> right size that enough zero bytes will be copied in. So, instead of
> choosing this value to be the size of the hash, let's just choose it to be
> 256, since that is a common size, is not to big, and will not result in too
> many extra iterations of the loop.
> 
> v2: split out from other patch, just hardcode array size instead of
>     dynamically allocating something the right size
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
> CC: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> CC: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
> CC: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
> CC: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
> ---
>  security/keys/dh.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/keys/dh.c b/security/keys/dh.c
> index 9fecaea6c298..74f8a853872e 100644
> --- a/security/keys/dh.c
> +++ b/security/keys/dh.c
> @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ static int kdf_ctr(struct kdf_sdesc *sdesc, const u8 *src, unsigned int slen,
>  			goto err;
>  
>  		if (zlen && h) {
> -			u8 tmpbuffer[h];
> -			size_t chunk = min_t(size_t, zlen, h);
> +			u8 tmpbuffer[256];

Whoops, this should be 32, not 256. That shouldn't make any runtime
difference, but it'll closer match the allocation patterns from
before.

I'll let this sit for a bit and send v3.

Tycho

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tycho@tycho.ws (Tycho Andersen)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] dh key: get rid of stack allocated array for zeroes
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 21:13:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180424031324.GA3125@cisco> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180424010321.14739-3-tycho@tycho.ws>

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 07:03:21PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> We're interested in getting rid of all of the stack allocated arrays in
> the kernel: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621
> 
> This case is interesting, since we really just need an array of bytes that
> are zero. The loop already ensures that if the array isn't exactly the
> right size that enough zero bytes will be copied in. So, instead of
> choosing this value to be the size of the hash, let's just choose it to be
> 256, since that is a common size, is not to big, and will not result in too
> many extra iterations of the loop.
> 
> v2: split out from other patch, just hardcode array size instead of
>     dynamically allocating something the right size
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
> CC: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> CC: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
> CC: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
> CC: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
> ---
>  security/keys/dh.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/keys/dh.c b/security/keys/dh.c
> index 9fecaea6c298..74f8a853872e 100644
> --- a/security/keys/dh.c
> +++ b/security/keys/dh.c
> @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ static int kdf_ctr(struct kdf_sdesc *sdesc, const u8 *src, unsigned int slen,
>  			goto err;
>  
>  		if (zlen && h) {
> -			u8 tmpbuffer[h];
> -			size_t chunk = min_t(size_t, zlen, h);
> +			u8 tmpbuffer[256];

Whoops, this should be 32, not 256. That shouldn't make any runtime
difference, but it'll closer match the allocation patterns from
before.

I'll let this sit for a bit and send v3.

Tycho
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2018-04-24  3:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-24  1:03 [PATCH 1/3] big key: get rid of stack array allocation Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03 ` [PATCH 2/3] dh key: get rid of stack allocated array Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03   ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03   ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03 ` [PATCH 3/3] dh key: get rid of stack allocated array for zeroes Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03   ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  1:03   ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  3:13   ` Tycho Andersen [this message]
2018-04-24  3:13     ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  3:13     ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24  4:50 ` [PATCH 1/3] big key: get rid of stack array allocation Eric Biggers
2018-04-24  4:50   ` Eric Biggers
2018-04-24  4:50   ` Eric Biggers
2018-04-24 14:35   ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 14:35     ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 14:35     ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 14:46     ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-24 14:46       ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-24 14:46       ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-24 14:51       ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 14:51         ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 14:51         ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 19:58         ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-04-24 19:58           ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-04-24 19:58           ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-04-24 20:04           ` Kees Cook
2018-04-24 20:04             ` Kees Cook
2018-04-24 20:04             ` Kees Cook
2018-04-25 10:36             ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-25 10:36               ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-25 10:36               ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-04-25 14:15               ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-25 14:15                 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-25 14:15                 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-04-24 20:09           ` Eric Biggers
2018-04-24 20:09             ` Eric Biggers
2018-04-24 20:09             ` Eric Biggers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180424031324.GA3125@cisco \
    --to=tycho@tycho.ws \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.