[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyBsU_sxUuuNBMFUQonWOtfoW9AMk=vn=KLTKrkXVv+MA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:25:45 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
Scott Bauer <sbauer@....utah.edu>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>,
Jean-Philippe Aumasson <jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>, "Daniel J . Bernstein" <djb@...yp.to>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] siphash: add cryptographically secure hashtable function
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
>
> Indeed this would be a great first candidate. There are lots of places
> where MD5 (!!) is pulled in for this sort of thing, when SipHash could
> be a faster and leaner replacement (and arguably more secure than
> rusty MD5).
Yeah,. the TCP sequence number md5_transform() cases are likely the
best example of something where siphash might be good. That tends to
be really just a couple words of data (the address and port info) plus
the net_secret[] hash. I think they currently simply just fill in the
fixed-sized 64-byte md5-round area.
I wonder it's worth it to have a special spihash version that does
that same "fixed 64-byte area" thing.
But please talk to the netwotrking people. Maybe that's the proper way
to get this merged?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
