Re: LRW/XTS + Via Padlock Bug in 2.6.24-rc7?
From: Torben Viets
Date: Thu Jan 10 2008 - 05:43:19 EST
Thanks for the reply,
the patch doesn't work witch the patch utility, so I did it manually, hope this was rigth:
static void aes_crypt_copy(const u8 *in, u8 *out, u32 *key, struct cword *cword)
{
u8 tmp[AES_BLOCK_SIZE * 2]
__attribute__ ((__aligned__(PADLOCK_ALIGNMENT)));
memcpy(tmp, in, AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
// padlock_xcrypt(tmp, out, key, cword);
padlock_xcrypt(tmp, tmp, key, cword);
memcpy(out, tmp, AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
}
After rebuilding the kernel, I tried: cryptsetup -c aes-xts-plain -s 256 luksFormat /dev/raid/test
It does the same as before, dmesg says:
general protection fault: 0000 [#1]
Modules linked in: xt_TCPMSS xt_tcpmss iptable_mangle ipt_MASQUERADE xt_tcpudp pppoe pppox xt_mark xt_state iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4 iptable_filter ip_tables x_tables af_packet ppp_generic slhc aes_i586 dm_crypt dm_mod
Pid: 4409, comm: kcryptd Not tainted (2.6.24-rc7 #2)
EIP: 0060:[<c03599cc>] EFLAGS: 00010282 CPU: 0
EIP is at aes_crypt_copy+0x2c/0x50
EAX: f62e1ff0 EBX: f60ab850 ECX: 00000001 EDX: f60ab830
ESI: f620dda8 EDI: f620dda8 EBP: f62e1ff0 ESP: f620dda8
DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 0000 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
Process kcryptd (pid: 4409, ti=f620c000 task=f61f5030 task.ti=f620c000)
Stack: 638522f6 b587b135 a30487c5 d57aa809 f620de50 f620defc c02613e1 0000007b
f60ab850 f62e1ff0 f62e1ff0 f620de00 c0359ad6 f60ab830 f62e1ff0 f62e1ff0
00000010 c0267cfc f6edf6e0 f620de34 f620dea8 00000010 8f88b41a 3ba46549
Call Trace:
[<c02613e1>] blkcipher_walk_next+0x151/0x320
[<c0359ad6>] aes_decrypt+0x56/0x60
[<c0267cfc>] crypt+0xdc/0x110
[<c0359a80>] aes_decrypt+0x0/0x60
[<c0267e22>] decrypt+0x42/0x50
[<c035a1c0>] aes_encrypt+0x0/0x60
[<c0359a80>] aes_decrypt+0x0/0x60
[<f886a7de>] crypt_convert_scatterlist+0x6e/0xe0 [dm_crypt]
[<f886a9ea>] crypt_convert+0x19a/0x1c0 [dm_crypt]
[<f886aa10>] kcryptd_do_crypt+0x0/0x260 [dm_crypt]
[<f886aa59>] kcryptd_do_crypt+0x49/0x260 [dm_crypt]
[<c011964a>] update_curr+0xfa/0x110
[<f886aa10>] kcryptd_do_crypt+0x0/0x260 [dm_crypt]
[<c012aeb6>] run_workqueue+0x66/0xe0
[<c03f3339>] schedule+0x149/0x270
[<c012b620>] worker_thread+0x0/0x100
[<c012b6bd>] worker_thread+0x9d/0x100
[<c012e4c0>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x50
[<c012b620>] worker_thread+0x0/0x100
[<c012e182>] kthread+0x42/0x70
[<c012e140>] kthread+0x0/0x70
[<c0104acf>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x18
=======================
Code: ec 30 89 5c 24 20 89 cb 89 74 24 24 89 c6 89 7c 24 28 89 e7 89 6c 24 2c 89 d5 8b 54 24 34 a5 a5 a5 a5 b9 01 00 00 00 89 e6 89 e7 <f3> 0f a7 c8 89 ef 89 e6 a5 a5 a5 a5 8b 5c 24 20 8b 74 24 24 8b
EIP: [<c03599cc>] aes_crypt_copy+0x2c/0x50 SS:ESP 0068:f620dda8
---[ end trace 927124c395b6378a ]---
note: kcryptd[4409] exited with preempt_count 1
One other strange thing ist, that after rebooting the entry:
name : xts(aes)
driver : xts(aes-padlock)
module : kernel
priority : 300
refcnt : 2
type : blkcipher
blocksize : 16
min keysize : 32
max keysize : 64
ivsize : 16
is not visible in /proc/crypt (and of course not useable with cryptsetup), till I use /etc/init.d/udev restart.
Sorry I don't no why this happens. I guess it is because of reloading the modules, these are my modules:
xt_TCPMSS 3840 1
xt_tcpmss 2176 1
iptable_mangle 2752 1
ipt_MASQUERADE 3456 1
xt_tcpudp 3136 6
pppoe 12800 2
pppox 3852 1 pppoe
xt_mark 1792 1
xt_state 2368 1
iptable_nat 7236 1
nf_nat 17964 2 ipt_MASQUERADE,iptable_nat
nf_conntrack_ipv4 9988 3 iptable_nat
iptable_filter 2880 1
ip_tables 12232 3 iptable_mangle,iptable_nat,iptable_filter
x_tables 14724 8 xt_TCPMSS,xt_tcpmss,ipt_MASQUERADE,xt_tcpudp,xt_mark,xt_state,iptable_nat,ip_tables
af_packet 21188 4
ppp_generic 23700 6 pppoe,pppox
slhc 6464 1 ppp_generic
aes_i586 33280 0
dm_crypt 13956 1
dm_mod 54976 14 dm_crypt
grettings
Torben Viets
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: "Herbert Xu" <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Gesendet: 10.01.08 04:03:26
> An: Torben Viets <viets@xxxxxx>
> CC: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Betreff: Re: LRW/XTS + Via Padlock Bug in 2.6.24-rc7?
>
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 10:55:27PM +0000, Torben Viets wrote:
> >
> > eneral protection fault: 0000 [#1]
> > Modules linked in: xt_TCPMSS xt_tcpmss iptable_mangle ipt_MASQUERADE
> > xt_tcpudp xt_mark xt_state iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4
> > iptable_filter ip_tables x_tables pppoe pppox af_packet ppp_generic slhc
> > aes_i586
> > CPU: 0
> > EIP: 0060:[<c035b828>] Not tainted VLI
> > EFLAGS: 00010292 (2.6.23.12 #7)
> > EIP is at aes_crypt_copy+0x28/0x40
> > eax: f7639ff0 ebx: f6c24050 ecx: 00000001 edx: f6c24030
> > esi: f7e89dc8 edi: f7639ff0 ebp: 00010000 esp: f7e89dc8
>
> Thanks for the report. It would appear that your CPU goes one step
> further than the other report and insists on having two blocks in the
> destination too.
>
> Please let me know whether this patch fixes the problem.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
> Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
> PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
> --
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/padlock-aes.c b/drivers/crypto/padlock-aes.c
> index a337b69..ed3ae47 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/padlock-aes.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/padlock-aes.c
> @@ -433,7 +433,8 @@ static void aes_crypt_copy(const u8 *in, u8 *out, u32 *key, struct cword *cword)
> __attribute__ ((__aligned__(PADLOCK_ALIGNMENT)));
>
> memcpy(tmp, in, AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
> - padlock_xcrypt(tmp, out, key, cword);
> + padlock_xcrypt(tmp, tmp, key, cword);
> + memcpy(out, tmp, AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
> }
>
> static inline void aes_crypt(const u8 *in, u8 *out, u32 *key,
>
_______________________________________________________________________
Jetzt neu! Schützen Sie Ihren PC mit McAfee und WEB.DE. 30 Tage
kostenlos testen. http://www.pc-sicherheit.web.de/startseite/?mc=022220
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/