Re: CCM/GCM implementation defect

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 03:24:59PM +0200, Martin Willi wrote:
>
> Do you have any pointer for me where this is defined? Why is it needed,
> given that GCM implicitly authenticates the IV by using it in Y0?

Actually you're quite right.  Both GCM and CCM implicitly includes
the IV in the authentication tag.

In fact after reviewing the two relevant RFCs (4106/4309) it seems
that we are correct after all since they explicitly exclude the IV
from the AAD.

Now we just need to figre out whether we're still OK with RFC4543.

Sorry for the false alarm.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux