From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00DEFC433DF for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:09:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF387207F7 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:09:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1591333752; bh=UzyDlahrvzCn5RxpxYl+m85rQsa0HCgoF/xHBV+f4j0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=Zpt7mXarMAmR0ypjileVGKDo011azaq8Lhfc3nTVeSrTLogIId+VVZhbiMqc7Diif 0RxI/HAr41txnTLUyfaSigolIrWa8zZ6PJOZu4V7XKi+bvlbM9zbbjZas+9Mwp5jV0 NOw4y73iB33S0h5UN+hJjAP/xayTpj6LljjlbxSU= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726016AbgFEFJM (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2020 01:09:12 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49816 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725280AbgFEFJL (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2020 01:09:11 -0400 Received: from sol.localdomain (c-107-3-166-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [107.3.166.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72612207D5; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:09:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1591333751; bh=UzyDlahrvzCn5RxpxYl+m85rQsa0HCgoF/xHBV+f4j0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TKh1NKbROLLp3vX6PmXrzkE1rDwcwsFbSe5Uud+LufF6E+qldnJPBWfWT5czJbw9i qSIvkZ7swPo6k02ohRf0Ax+mLYUjFFOKUE+qNbeN/XDe07To5TmfM4UPQLXtAn/t3S B2SAJnNLi5Y6y5J9T24xtdetUL0+HESHpNMqamf4= Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 22:09:10 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Herbert Xu Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Corentin Labbe , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Steffen Klassert Subject: Re: [PATCH net] esp: select CRYPTO_SEQIV Message-ID: <20200605050910.GS2667@sol.localdomain> References: <20200604192322.22142-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200605002858.GB31846@gondor.apana.org.au> <20200605002956.GA31947@gondor.apana.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200605002956.GA31947@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 10:29:56AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 10:28:58AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > Hmm, the selection list doesn't include CTR so just adding SEQIV > > per se makes no sense. I'm not certain that we really want to > > include every algorithm under the sun. Steffen, what do you think? > > Or how about > > select CRYPTO_SEQIV if CRYPTO_CTR > > That would make more sense. > > Cheers, There's also a case where "seqiv" is used without counter mode: net/xfrm/xfrm_algo.c: { .name = "rfc7539esp(chacha20,poly1305)", .uinfo = { .aead = { .geniv = "seqiv", .icv_truncbits = 128, } }, .pfkey_supported = 0, }, FWIW, we make CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION select only the algorithms that we consider the "default", and any "non-default" algorithms need to be explicitly enabled. Is something similar going on here with INET_ESP and INET_ESP6? Should "seqiv" be considered a "default" for IPsec? - Eric