Linux-Integrity Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.ibm.com>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc: "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" 
	<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] crypto: sm3 - add a new alias name sm3-256
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:02:42 -0500
Message-ID: <9683f764-c8c7-e123-b5f6-4f155bd1b10b@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR0401MB36523805F71721000F188F2FC3190@CY4PR0401MB3652.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>

On 2/10/2020 12:01 PM, Van Leeuwen, Pascal wrote:
> Well, the current specification surely doesn't define anything else and is
> already over a decade old. So what would be the odds that they add a
> different blocksize variant_now_  AND still call that SM3-something?

I just got a note from a cryptographer who said there were discussions 
last year about a future SM3 with 512 bit output.

Given that, why not plan ahead and use sm3-256?  Is there any downside?
Is the cost any more than 4 bytes in some source code?

  parent reply index

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-07  9:22 [PATCH] IMA hash algorithm supports sm3-256 Tianjia Zhang
2020-02-07  9:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] crypto: sm3 - add a new alias name sm3-256 Tianjia Zhang
2020-02-10  3:17   ` Eric Biggers
     [not found]     ` <b7ce247b-ede1-4b01-bb11-894c042679e1.tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
2020-02-10 12:06       ` 回复:[PATCH " Tianjia Zhang
2020-02-10 16:30     ` [PATCH " Ken Goldman
2020-02-10 16:39       ` James Bottomley
     [not found]       ` <7a496bb15f264eab920bf081338d67af@MN2PR20MB2973.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
2020-02-10 17:01         ` Van Leeuwen, Pascal
2020-02-10 17:39           ` Mimi Zohar
2020-02-10 18:02           ` Ken Goldman [this message]
2020-02-10 18:36             ` Eric Biggers
     [not found]           ` <3b21122352a44cb9a20030a32f07e38a@MN2PR20MB2973.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
2020-02-11  7:56             ` Van Leeuwen, Pascal
2020-02-07  9:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] ima: add sm3-256 algorithm to hash algorithm configuration list Tianjia Zhang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=9683f764-c8c7-e123-b5f6-4f155bd1b10b@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=kgold@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-Integrity Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/0 linux-integrity/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-integrity linux-integrity/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity \
		linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-integrity

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-integrity


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git