Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751553AbaKKCzp (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:55:45 -0500 Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com ([209.85.223.172]:33474 "EHLO mail-ie0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751260AbaKKCzo (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:55:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1979092.odOtqL46qU@tachyon.chronox.de> References: <1979092.odOtqL46qU@tachyon.chronox.de> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:55:43 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: crypto: zeroization of sensitive data in af_alg From: Sandy Harris To: Stephan Mueller Cc: Herbert Xu , LKML , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote: > while working on the AF_ALG interface, I saw no active zeroizations of memory > that may hold sensitive data that is maintained outside the kernel crypto API > cipher handles. ... > I think I found the location for the first one: hash_sock_destruct that should > be enhanced with a memset(0) of ctx->result. See also a thread titled "memset() in crypto code?" on the linux crypto list. The claim is that gcc can optimise memset() away so you need a different function to guarantee the intended results. There's a patch to the random driver that uses a new function memzero_explicit(), and one of the newer C standards has a different function name for the purpose. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/