From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 12:44:24 +0200 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by lore.white.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vBWKO-00AZw8-0t for lore@lore.pengutronix.de; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 12:44:24 +0200 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:3::133]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1vBWKN-00030K-O0 for lore@pengutronix.de; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 12:44:24 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From :Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=/GxeVoAN6KOTVtMXFByjRmJyryJL0/i4RTekQmaYAtM=; b=ORDGkHrpDIzldQHeYs1a2d+i75 b+Uxx/IsSPdFs/ivWy2BYdm+T4ojeE+YgNY+Fnhx9oozjV504nQPe3c6fzNEfER6E9ESGWLkUQ5fy yUjcSFcmc9TvV5jAjIaBMc/SgQXFbrZUtP8QbuyOgDh1DncDlNX+WaneuOS9sLzLybk3wauSqTINB Q7zTgi+OYiq/N7CTBBRjjMZe+McYDqMTQUs6WS8Gbq9T0+Ntv7LePEQ235eimUXTgDcKNhp0asbWd Ygundocr9cu3VA0XxyH4es9HMOPTVPIe87FmKPJYcQzhCaEj2Vclc2HczXD4SCw6QxrFtDtN9YYMP Iux2PTnQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vBWJr-00000002WmW-0wex; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 10:43:51 +0000 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vBWJo-00000002Wm9-2l2u for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 10:43:50 +0000 Received: from ptz.office.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:900:1d::77] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1vBWJm-0002vD-Rw; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 12:43:46 +0200 Message-ID: <03fc4cb8-beca-4ddb-96aa-27ecf3fa1ad3@pengutronix.de> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 12:43:46 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Ahmad Fatoum , Sascha Hauer , BAREBOX References: <20251014-tlv-signature-v1-0-7a8aaf95081c@pengutronix.de> <20251014-tlv-signature-v1-9-7a8aaf95081c@pengutronix.de> <7d50c7d4-06a2-40d4-9b77-114c5ab923ba@pengutronix.de> From: Jonas Rebmann Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <7d50c7d4-06a2-40d4-9b77-114c5ab923ba@pengutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20251022_034348_720869_EA5ACF18 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 11.12 ) X-BeenThere: barebox@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "barebox" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2607:7c80:54:3::133 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: barebox-bounces+lore=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/15] common: tlv: Add TLV-Signature support X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 08 May 2019 21:11:16 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de) Hi Ahmad, Just answering to what I don't immediately apply for v2: On 2025-10-22 12:00, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >> +/* >> + * Retrieve length of header+TLVs (offset of spki hash part of signature if available) >> + */ >> + >> +static inline size_t tlv_spki_hash_offset(const struct tlv_header *header) >> +{ >> + size_t ret = size_add(sizeof(struct tlv_header), get_unaligned_be32(&header->length_tlv)); >> >> return ret; /* SIZE_MAX on overflow */ > > Shouldn't you then check for SIZE_MAX at callsites? I chose not to implement this check in all places using those size/offset helpers. In "[PATCH 01/15] common: clean up TLV code", I check early in the TLV handling, that tlv_total_len() doesn't overflow. Later on, it is guaranteed that calls to tlv_total_len(), tlv_spki_hash_offset() and the such cannot overflow. If I where to check at callsites of tlv_spki_hash_offset() I'd need to check at all callsites of all TLV size/offset helperss, which seemed unnecessary. What do you think? Regards, Jonas -- Pengutronix e.K. | Jonas Rebmann | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9 |