On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 11:06:10AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> commit f699594d436960160f6d5ba84ed4a222f20d11cd upstream.
> [Please apply to 4.4-stable.]
>
> GCM instances can be created by either the "gcm" template, which only
> allows choosing the block cipher, e.g. "gcm(aes)"; or by "gcm_base",
> which allows choosing the ctr and ghash implementations, e.g.
> "gcm_base(ctr(aes-generic),ghash-generic)".
>
> However, a "gcm_base" instance prevents a "gcm" instance from being
> registered using the same implementations. Nor will the instance be
> found by lookups of "gcm". This can be used as a denial of service.
> Moreover, "gcm_base" instances are never tested by the crypto
> self-tests, even if there are compatible "gcm" tests.
>
> The root cause of these problems is that instances of the two templates
> use different cra_names. Therefore, fix these problems by making
> "gcm_base" instances set the same cra_name as "gcm" instances, e.g.
> "gcm(aes)" instead of "gcm_base(ctr(aes-generic),ghash-generic)".
>
> This requires extracting the block cipher name from the name of the ctr
> algorithm. It also requires starting to verify that the algorithms are
> really ctr and ghash, not something else entirely. But it would be
> bizarre if anyone were actually using non-gcm-compatible algorithms with
> gcm_base, so this shouldn't break anyone in practice.
>
> Fixes: d00aa19b507b ("[CRYPTO] gcm: Allow block cipher parameter")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> crypto/gcm.c | 34 +++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
Both now queued up, thanks.
greg k-h
