Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20170610025912.6499-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <878tkzq6wi.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> From: Emil Lenngren Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 23:30:33 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Constant Time Memory Comparisons Are Important To: Emmanuel Grumbach Cc: Kees Cook , Kalle Valo , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , LKML , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Anna Schumaker , David Howells , David Safford , "David S. Miller" , Gilad Ben-Yossef , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Gustavo Padovan , "J. Bruce Fields" , Jeff Layton , Johan Hedberg , Johannes Berg , Marcel Holtmann , Mimi Zohar , Trond Myklebust , keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Bluez mailing list , "open list:NFS, SUNRPC, AND..." , linux-wireless , Network Development Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-ID: 2017-06-11 22:48 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Grumbach : > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> > "Jason A. Donenfeld" writes: >> > >> >> Whenever you're comparing two MACs, it's important to do this using >> >> crypto_memneq instead of memcmp. With memcmp, you leak timing information, >> >> which could then be used to iteratively forge a MAC. >> > >> > Do you have any pointers where I could learn more about this? >> >> While not using C specifically, this talks about the problem generally: >> https://www.chosenplaintext.ca/articles/beginners-guide-constant-time-cryptography.html >> > > Sorry for the stupid question, but the MAC address is in plaintext in > the air anyway or easily accessible via user space tools. I fail to > see what it is so secret about a MAC address in that code where that > same MAC address is accessible via myriads of ways. I think you're mixing up Media Access Control (MAC) addresses with Message Authentication Code (MAC). The second one is a cryptographic signature of a message.