From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: Misalignment, MIPS, and ip_hdr(skb)->version Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 16:30:27 +0100 Message-ID: <20161211153027.GD29761@lunn.ch> References: <095cac5b-b757-6f4a-e699-8eedf9ed7221@stressinduktion.org> <87vauvhwdu.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <20161211071501.GA32621@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Netdev , LKML , Dan =?iso-8859-1?Q?L=FCdtke?= , Willy Tarreau , =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= , Hannes Frederic Sowa , WireGuard mailing list , Greg KH , Felix Fietkau , Jiri Benc , David Miller To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org > 3. Add 3 bytes of padding, set to zero, to the encrypted section just > before the IP header, marked for future use. > Pros: satisfies IETF mantras, can use those extra bits in the future > for interesting protocol extensions for authenticated peers. > Cons: lowers MTU, marginally more difficult to implement but still > probably just one or two lines of code. I'm not a crypto expert, but does this not give you a helping hand in breaking the crypto? You know the plain text value of these bytes, and where they are in the encrypted text. Andrew