Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756630Ab2HOVLP (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:11:15 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com ([143.182.124.36]:22054 "EHLO azsmga102.ch.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755013Ab2HOVLN (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:11:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120815201135.GA10088@amd1> References: <20120815201135.GA10088@amd1> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 00:11:10 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/7] integrity: added digest calculation function From: "Kasatkin, Dmitry" To: Serge Hallyn Cc: zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jmorris@namei.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, dhowells@redhat.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3718 Lines: 102 On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Dmitry Kasatkin (dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com): >> There are several functions, that need to calculate digest. >> This patch adds common function for use by integrity subsystem. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Kasatkin >> --- >> security/integrity/digsig.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> security/integrity/integrity.h | 3 +++ >> 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/security/integrity/digsig.c b/security/integrity/digsig.c >> index 2dc167d..61a0c92 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/digsig.c >> +++ b/security/integrity/digsig.c >> @@ -13,9 +13,9 @@ >> #define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt >> >> #include >> -#include >> #include >> #include >> +#include >> >> #include "integrity.h" >> >> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ static const char *keyring_name[INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MAX] = { >> }; >> >> int integrity_digsig_verify(const unsigned int id, const char *sig, int siglen, >> - const char *digest, int digestlen) >> + const char *digest, int digestlen) >> { >> if (id >= INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MAX) >> return -EINVAL; >> @@ -46,3 +46,30 @@ int integrity_digsig_verify(const unsigned int id, const char *sig, int siglen, >> >> return digsig_verify(keyring[id], sig, siglen, digest, digestlen); >> } >> + >> +int integrity_calc_digest(const char *algo, const void *data, const int len, >> + char *digest) >> +{ >> + int rc = -ENOMEM; >> + struct crypto_shash *tfm; >> + >> + tfm = crypto_alloc_shash(algo, 0, 0); >> + if (IS_ERR(tfm)) { >> + rc = PTR_ERR(tfm); >> + pr_err("Can not allocate %s (reason: %d)\n", algo, rc); >> + return rc; >> + } else { >> + struct { >> + struct shash_desc shash; >> + char ctx[crypto_shash_descsize(tfm)]; >> + } desc; > > Needless confusing indentation here. Just move the struct {} desc; to the > top and drop the else. That will make it much more readable. > Intention was to allocate it only if tfm allocation succeeded.. But indeed failure very unlikely.. thanks. >> + desc.shash.tfm = tfm; >> + desc.shash.flags = 0; >> + >> + rc = crypto_shash_digest(&desc.shash, data, len, digest); >> + } >> + >> + crypto_free_shash(tfm); >> + return rc; >> +} >> diff --git a/security/integrity/integrity.h b/security/integrity/integrity.h >> index e21362a..48ee2d4 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/integrity.h >> +++ b/security/integrity/integrity.h >> @@ -59,6 +59,9 @@ struct integrity_iint_cache *integrity_iint_find(struct inode *inode); >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_INTEGRITY_SIGNATURE >> >> +int integrity_calc_digest(const char *algo, const void *data, const int len, >> + char *digest); >> + >> int integrity_digsig_verify(const unsigned int id, const char *sig, int siglen, >> const char *digest, int digestlen); >> >> -- >> 1.7.9.5 >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- 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/