Am Montag, 1. Juni 2015, 15:42:41 schrieb Johannes Berg:
Hi Johannes,
>On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 15:21 +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>> Just a short question on ieee80211_aes_ccm_encrypt,
>> ieee80211_aes_ccm_decrypt, ieee80211_aes_gcm_encrypt,
>> ieee80211_aes_gcm_decrypt, ieee80211_aes_gmac: can the aad parameter of
>> these functions be zero?
>
>What do you mean by "zero"? The pointer itself can clearly never be
>NULL.
Thanks for clarifying: indeed I mean the value of the pointer, not the pointer
itself :-)
>
>The contents, now, that's a more interesting question. I believe it can
>never be all zeroes, since association request frames are not
>encrypted/protected and thus at least one byte in here must be non-zero.
>The MAC addresses are also very likely non-zero, but technically
>00:00:00:00:00:00 is a valid MAC address I believe.
So, even when having a malicious AP, that value is never zero? The driver of
the question is the following code in the patch set:
+ sg_set_buf(&sg[0], &aad[2], be16_to_cpup((__be16 *)aad));
...
+ aead_request_set_crypt(aead_req, sg, sg, data_len, b_0);
...
crypto_aead_encrypt(aead_req);
When I played around with the aead_request_set_crypt, I saw a crash in the
scatterlist handling of the crypto API when the first SGL entry has a zero
length.
Ciao
Stephan
--
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
