Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@nxp.com>
To:     Iuliana Prodan <iuliana.prodan@nxp.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        Aymen Sghaier <aymen.sghaier@nxp.com>
CC:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/14] crypto: caam - check assoclen
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2 06/14] crypto: caam - check assoclen
Thread-Index: AQHVPcSrPwrclwKlbUCTKS9P1HlDCw==
Date:   Fri, 19 Jul 2019 15:06:38 +0000
Message-ID: <VI1PR0402MB34850ACE9BD5CC43A150085798CB0@VI1PR0402MB3485.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1563494276-3993-1-git-send-email-iuliana.prodan@nxp.com>
 <1563494276-3993-7-git-send-email-iuliana.prodan@nxp.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nxp.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8f46f3fc-aeb4-4584-65c5-08d70c5ab30c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Jul 2019 15:06:38.6218
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 686ea1d3-bc2b-4c6f-a92c-d99c5c301635
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: horia.geanta@nxp.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR0402MB3821
Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org

On 7/19/2019 2:58 AM, Iuliana Prodan wrote:=0A=
[...]=0A=
> --- a/drivers/crypto/caam/common_if.c=0A=
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/caam/common_if.c=0A=
> @@ -66,6 +66,23 @@ int check_rfc4106_authsize(unsigned int authsize)=0A=
>  }=0A=
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(check_rfc4106_authsize);=0A=
>  =0A=
> +/*=0A=
> + * validate assoclen for RFC4106/RFC4543=0A=
> + */=0A=
> +int check_ipsec_assoclen(unsigned int assoclen)=0A=
> +{=0A=
> +	switch (assoclen) {=0A=
> +	case 16:=0A=
> +	case 20:=0A=
> +		break;=0A=
> +	default:=0A=
> +		return -EINVAL;=0A=
> +	}=0A=
> +=0A=
> +	return 0;=0A=
> +}=0A=
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(check_ipsec_assoclen);=0A=
> +=0A=
It's probably worth making this function (and even the other ones=0A=
in common_if) inline.=0A=
=0A=
Herbert, is it worth having these checks moved to crypto API,=0A=
so they could be shared b/w all implementations?=0A=
=0A=
This would also provide clear guidance wrt. rules related to=0A=
input parameters length.=0A=
=0A=
Thanks,=0A=
Horia=0A=