lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] Make cryptoapi non-optional?
On Sat, Aug 09, 2003 at 01:04:18AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 02:44:59 -0500
> Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> wrote:
>
> > The attached (lightly tested) patch gets rid of the SHA in the
> > /dev/random code and replaces it with cryptoapi, leaving us with just
> > one SHA implementation.
> ...
> > __u32 secure_tcp_syn_cookie(__u32 saddr, __u32 daddr, __u16 sport,
> > __u16 dport, __u32 sseq, __u32 count, __u32 data)
> ...
> > + tfm = crypto_alloc_tfm("sha1", 0);
>

> This patch needs tons of work.

Yes, it's completely bogus. It also needs tons of error-checking, etc.
All of which is a big waste of time if the answer to "is making
cryptoapi mandatory ok?" is no. So before embarking on the hard part,
I thought I'd ask the hard question.

--
Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : of or relating to the moon
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.126 / U:3.768 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site