From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2255D369990 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 18:52:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790880753; cv=none; b=YK7DUDua0HbKalXfB6Q5UkLgZlyeLxSy+V2CjoIoeOuzEggVlVmKZaxXxB4+b8OKtKdI90tGKV7DFPjbZ+LYNC8g+5unXpDy0wmq/gJXRctoiDCa5sGZcVZd3HO2lgWxBuZrXmXQNcYJe3rYHH+mr40XJC6garnSt3Dg8js+uao= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790880753; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NzLZKjU8ptejrY+87RgUK703ZHzae+j0fTkW4FgVOn8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=GfdsZ3YMOhy4HGFfSq3iY6L2/8nCcix6aLTYhuzKJhvxtocUAIEQ+jmaVZieksok8GfRU5ZhZu8TH+biHOgsaKKxUx0fTXBuo03GlGMquD5FUVlH+I4Xd+IRVEwzG8Xl21TAIij1uBzOEi7zNski40COFj0j/Vnxt7I31+G78xU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=BuHRCdDv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="BuHRCdDv" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1790880751; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NzLZKjU8ptejrY+87RgUK703ZHzae+j0fTkW4FgVOn8=; b=BuHRCdDvv+kRg0c5tGM5vjWKu96AzFCGGFPczGPifHUNFRdUCtwsJMT1wBdt/tKB8uYma4 2i+25e6UIHur5a26mHvIPF3RlQlIcNqW6bxW3wGO/1OIxtsGXVF8yAj93xCykvETHXx/6Q uZzW8O9v5ZucrFNoe8xwdHDmnCr31yQ= Received: from mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-659-hxfPdkq5MC2aPInYBxrjgw-1; Thu, 01 Oct 2026 14:52:25 -0400 X-MC-Unique: hxfPdkq5MC2aPInYBxrjgw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: hxfPdkq5MC2aPInYBxrjgw_1790880744 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23D531905692; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 18:52:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jtornosm-thinkpadp1gen7.rmtes.csb (headnet04.pony-001.prod.iad2.dc.redhat.com [10.2.32.116]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9106D1956089; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 18:52:20 +0000 (UTC) From: Jose Ignacio Tornos Martinez To: johannes@sipsolutions.net Cc: davem@davemloft.net, emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, ilan.peer@intel.com, jtornosm@redhat.com, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, miriam.rachel.korenblit@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] wifi: add opt-in FIPS exception for iwlwifi Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2026 20:52:18 +0200 Message-ID: <20261001185218.189030-1-jtornosm@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 Hi Johannes, > I don't _think_ it does that. It does behave a bit differently for MFP, > but that's wrt. management frames. Good to know. I will re-test with just MFP re-enabled and no data keys to hardware, adding more debug logging to understand where data gets stuck. Something else must have been wrong in my v1 test. > Fundamentally, in this case the driver (even mac80211) shouldn't install > (data) keys to hardware. Ok > I'd need to sit down and (re-)derive that, but I don't recall it being > particularly tricky - just boils down to the various dependencies > between features. Ok, I can assume there are no other dependencies to start with. > Presumably that would mean IGTK/BIGTK can be offloaded and remain > working, but TK/GTK can't be known to the firmware since it's not FIPS > certified. Ok, I will take this approach for v3: IGTK/BIGTK offloaded to firmware, PTK/GTK software-only. > I mean, you _could_ push this further and keep almost all features: you > still give PTK/GTK to firmware but don't use the offload mechanisms for > data frames; though presumably then you'd not consider the result "good > enough" since then a non-certified component (the firmware/hardware) > holds the keys...? Ok, for our customers having the keys in a non-certified component would not be acceptable. The simpler approach is better for this case. > I have no opinion on that, I guess the crypto folks should chime in > about that. Having something very obvious makes sense to me, vs. having > it at wifi or even driver level. Then I will keep the boot parameter approach and make sure to Cc the crypto maintainers for their input. I will work on the feature dependencies myself and come back with a cleaner v3. Thanks for the guidance, very helpful. Best regards Jose Ignacio