From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3027AC433B4 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF14B613FD for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233898AbhDTVDW (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:03:22 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:26534 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233548AbhDTVDV (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:03:21 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13KKY6ZT125881; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:02:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=tjLwptpGapR+G6kW/74l72xR3hpJOewr9nnuMzs60Gs=; b=L8hCkc6705h8XBeoZlkxOu3RHuWi/jzm2IQY/0BCJefllhIUDaDlwQll+qDU+KS898VV uVPrpch8+HpXe4x7gO7TKXnNcYIBFo88qOZAVgOKJvSRSk+jBeSP7H5skvSE4tFdZroC 9/80OOaVr7yLkwBKzh6LdO0bPfH7tIdgiFV6D6hzpy9Jvb0eJCNm4IeDJWGoFWBNRImQ C5NG+4LUwL6WFV45xWzNSCc21XK+vrIUGilWVBD6fIsTM/F6wuB4UICNde47bJRZ9OxX 0Uoc/rPrcqKjRr85KsdDhtp0cGU7IrGlEWfvVSQYQXY0jSn+H2BkVQ00rmS2urgzJ3rC Eg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3820863srr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:02:48 -0400 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13KKsTEh018571; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:02:47 -0400 Received: from ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (83.d6.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.214.131]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3820863srf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:02:47 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13KKuXtN017741; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:46 GMT Received: from b03cxnp07027.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07027.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.14]) by ppma01dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 37yqaa4akk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:46 +0000 Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.232]) by b03cxnp07027.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 13KL2jlM33751438 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:45 GMT Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3D06E052; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE6B26E050; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.47.158.152] (unknown [9.47.158.152]) by b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:02:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] certs: Add support for using elliptic curve keys for signing modules To: Jessica Yu Cc: keyrings@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com, zohar@linux.ibm.com, jarkko@kernel.org, nayna@linux.ibm.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20210408152403.1189121-1-stefanb@linux.ibm.com> <20210408152403.1189121-3-stefanb@linux.ibm.com> From: Stefan Berger Message-ID: <794ef635-de91-9207-f28b-ab6805fd95c9@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:02:44 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: I5XP_N6a_PhFOdCTJgRAYyMeGJ6I1AWC X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: kGtwcPUsKloKTA-e0-UPqv-xapRc5t27 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-20_11:2021-04-20,2021-04-20 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1011 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104060000 definitions=main-2104200141 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On 4/20/21 10:03 AM, Jessica Yu wrote: > +++ Stefan Berger [08/04/21 11:24 -0400]: >> >> diff --git a/crypto/asymmetric_keys/pkcs7_parser.c >> b/crypto/asymmetric_keys/pkcs7_parser.c >> index 967329e0a07b..2546ec6a0505 100644 >> --- a/crypto/asymmetric_keys/pkcs7_parser.c >> +++ b/crypto/asymmetric_keys/pkcs7_parser.c >> @@ -269,6 +269,10 @@ int pkcs7_sig_note_pkey_algo(void *context, >> size_t hdrlen, >>         ctx->sinfo->sig->pkey_algo = "rsa"; >>         ctx->sinfo->sig->encoding = "pkcs1"; >>         break; >> +    case OID_id_ecdsa_with_sha256: >> +        ctx->sinfo->sig->pkey_algo = "ecdsa"; >> +        ctx->sinfo->sig->encoding = "x962"; >> +        break; > > Hi Stefan, > > Does CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_KEY_TYPE_ECDSA have a dependency on > MODULE_SIG_SHA256? You are right, per the code above it does have a dependency on SHA256. ECDSA is using NIST p384 (secp384r1) for signing and per my tests it can be paired with all the sha hashes once the code above is extended. Now when it comes to module signing, should we pair it with a particular hash? I am not currently aware of a guidance document on this but sha256 and sha384 seem to be good choices these days, so maybe selecting ECDSA module signing should have a 'depends on' on these?   Stefan