From: Jeff Barnes <jeffbarnes@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Joachim Vandersmissen <git@jvdsn.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jeff Barnes <jeffbarnes@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: aead: add service indicator flag for RFC4106 AES-GCM
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 10:00:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9e6bf51-1222-4901-b7a9-9d47c0abbac5@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aaZXa9GHhbvmyqLR@gondor.apana.org.au>
On 3/2/26 22:37, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 04:51:38PM -0500, Jeff Barnes wrote:
>>
>> For instance, ceph, samba, tls, to name a few. They all instantiate the
>> gcm(aes) template. They all construct their own IV. They are all compliant
>> to SP 800-38d. I am pretty sure that at least one constructs it per 8.2.2
>> while the rest construct per 8.2.1.
>
> Perhaps they could switch to IV generation in a way that's similar
> to seqiv?
Actually, there's no need to do that. They are all compliant already
with the spec.
The issue according to the CMVP (NIST) is that because the kernel crypto
api is, well, an api, that it is *possible* to instantiate the gcm(aes)
template and generate an IV in a non-compliant way. Even when pressing
the point that the kernel is monolithic, hence self-contained, and
booted with lockdown=integrity, the point is lost on the certifying
body. Their response is to implement the service indicator "like all the
other distros". That is a very unfortunate way of putting it. It is what
it is.
So currently, for the kernel (crypto api) to pass FIPS 140-3
certification, the only viable solution is to either implement the
out-of-tree patch or disallow gcm(aes) in FIPS mode. Of the two, the
out-of-tree patch is expensive but the lesser of the two evils.
I like the idea of automatically switching to seqiv or rfc4106 templates
when in FIPS mode. The unfortunate consequence is scale. There are 24
gcm(aes) template instantiations spread out through the kernel tree with
about as many maintainers. Each of them generate an IV. That seems to me
to be too large scale.
Please reconsider.
Best regards,
Jeff
>
> Cheers,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-12 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-29 21:04 jeffbarnes
2026-01-30 5:10 ` Herbert Xu
2026-02-17 20:59 ` Jeff Barnes
2026-02-28 8:56 ` Herbert Xu
2026-03-01 20:41 ` Joachim Vandersmissen
2026-03-02 12:26 ` Herbert Xu
2026-03-02 21:34 ` Jeff Barnes
2026-03-02 21:51 ` Jeff Barnes
2026-03-03 3:37 ` Herbert Xu
2026-03-12 14:00 ` Jeff Barnes [this message]
2026-03-14 19:37 ` Eric Biggers
2026-03-03 15:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=a9e6bf51-1222-4901-b7a9-9d47c0abbac5@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=jeffbarnes@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=git@jvdsn.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jeffbarnes@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®