On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 07:37:17PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 05:57:30PM +0800, Guozihua (Scott) wrote:
> > On 2022/7/20 17:41, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 03:50:31PM +0800, GUO Zihua wrote:
> > > > A kasan error was reported during fuzzing:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > This patch fixes the issue by calling poly1305_init_arm64() instead of
> > > > poly1305_init_arch(). This is also the implementation for the same
> > > > algorithm on arm platform.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: f569ca164751 ("crypto: arm64/poly1305 - incorporate OpenSSL/CRYPTOGAMS NEON implementation")
> > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Signed-off-by: GUO Zihua <guozihua@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/arm64/crypto/poly1305-glue.c | 2 +-
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > I'm not a crypto guy by any stretch of the imagination, but Ard is out
> > > at the moment and this looks like an important fix so I had a crack at
> > > reviewing it.
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/crypto/poly1305-glue.c b/arch/arm64/crypto/poly1305-glue.c
> > > > index 9c3d86e397bf..1fae18ba11ed 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/crypto/poly1305-glue.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/crypto/poly1305-glue.c
> > > > @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static void neon_poly1305_blocks(struct poly1305_desc_ctx *dctx, const u8 *src,
> > > > {
> > > > if (unlikely(!dctx->sset)) {
> > > > if (!dctx->rset) {
> > > > - poly1305_init_arch(dctx, src);
> > > > + poly1305_init_arm64(&dctx->h, src);
> > > > src += POLY1305_BLOCK_SIZE;
> > > > len -= POLY1305_BLOCK_SIZE;
> > > > dctx->rset = 1;
> > >
> > > With this change, we no longer initialise dctx->buflen to 0 as part of the
> > > initialisation. Looking at neon_poly1305_do_update(), I'm a bit worried
> > > that we could land in the 'if (likely(len >= POLY1305_BLOCK_SIZE))' block,
> > > end up with len == 0 and fail to set dctx->buflen. Is this a problem, or is
> > > my ignorance showing?
> > >
> > > Will
> > > .
> >
> > Thanks Will.
> >
> > I noticed this as well, but I leaved it out so that the behavior is the same
> > as the implementation for arm. The buflen here seems to be used for
> > maintaining any excessive data after the last block, and is zeroed during
> > init. I am not sure why it should be zeroed again during key initialization.
> > Maybe the thought was that the very first block of the data is always used
> > for initializing rset and that is also considered to be the "initialization"
> > process for the algorithm, thus the zeroing of buflen. I could be completely
> > wrong though.
> >
>
> buflen is initialized by neon_poly1305_init(), so there's no issue here.
Ah yes, thanks. I missed that. In which case, for the very little it's
worth:
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
Herbert, please can you pick this up?
Will
