From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7622330D3E8 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791443242; cv=none; b=aImBjOwDCUTwLaTGn+GfZhO+8SVfjhzljc0b0zGzrunDin4u8i7eLVWZKAqQ7YgQTyIXCI97zBTR3Q2gCMuaBITuLxwL82EVtHg2pfQwTKN8JXH6iTWfR3/DKsSH4UyWV2+rd5waM6mB52cK+Gf2Yjge0fFet4nu4lonql1i+TQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791443242; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+LYfGfNbEhJrO8TwYGVq82QUevdS50sGk31etSR8dKw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=S6pypPMAlagwmFDfXTAfEURV/fWyUa5Pejm6PVXDn9DR4PUaBdRENlp7y0vvEjY5MNGMMf/ggOx2CyYIbY56+/FDBq7zAumSXYaNa+TDYvN2xRoUqb7IyqDloC7xChy3wEgXGQeqiX95FwGIifbqb4RvxVu8GXOJUaE5LahpUFY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=pttfKnLC; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=GQkTiTsS; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=pttfKnLC; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=GQkTiTsS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="pttfKnLC"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="GQkTiTsS"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="pttfKnLC"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="GQkTiTsS" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BBDC1F786; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:07:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1791443238; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GwjPw1mZUywYnKuWFhbnJ8X46JLzymUOdUflsOOTtw4=; b=pttfKnLCpk8vXshpeOFF21/8arvxxZE+LBWUTfS0mYL07v3Zx//9YMCP58V/CI2J+AiPlY iki1O4AVlMAHlmPyQDf7lAwKh5plPax8W9e7oPnSFCNw6QbLonW6SXXsxJFZy1yXnrhO+3 SNH3Zf16Gkp5PhgkEt67c9/+il5/4zI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1791443238; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GwjPw1mZUywYnKuWFhbnJ8X46JLzymUOdUflsOOTtw4=; b=GQkTiTsS+E456gCn6w3l9jIdqyxk5qAGvskqcWRcv3iXKLFz8aIO/mfEdaDKzSX3Fb3U22 Y79oTlqmHoJ8KEDw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=pttfKnLC; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=GQkTiTsS DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1791443238; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GwjPw1mZUywYnKuWFhbnJ8X46JLzymUOdUflsOOTtw4=; b=pttfKnLCpk8vXshpeOFF21/8arvxxZE+LBWUTfS0mYL07v3Zx//9YMCP58V/CI2J+AiPlY iki1O4AVlMAHlmPyQDf7lAwKh5plPax8W9e7oPnSFCNw6QbLonW6SXXsxJFZy1yXnrhO+3 SNH3Zf16Gkp5PhgkEt67c9/+il5/4zI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1791443238; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GwjPw1mZUywYnKuWFhbnJ8X46JLzymUOdUflsOOTtw4=; b=GQkTiTsS+E456gCn6w3l9jIdqyxk5qAGvskqcWRcv3iXKLFz8aIO/mfEdaDKzSX3Fb3U22 Y79oTlqmHoJ8KEDw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1E8713354; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:07:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id cx66JCVBx2qjZAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Thu, 08 Oct 2026 07:07:17 +0000 Message-ID: <0632ec1e-dcd3-42f9-bd0c-a809a6f6db09@suse.de> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2026 09:07:17 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: auth: validate DHCHAP secret before stopping authentication To: Sreeraj S Kurup , linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kbusch@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me References: <0602191a-81ce-4f8a-90d0-b47ba2bc36ac@suse.de> <20261003125115.2523-1-sreekuttan2156239@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Hannes Reinecke In-Reply-To: <20261003125115.2523-1-sreekuttan2156239@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.50 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-0.996]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; RBL_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com,lists.infradead.org]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[7]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns,suse.de:email,suse.de:dkim]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.de:+] X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Spam-Score: -4.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1BBDC1F786 On 10/3/26 2:51 PM, Sreeraj S Kurup wrote: > Hi Hannes, > > Yes, I agree that stopping the currently running authentication when the admin > requests a new one is intentional. > > The issue I was pointing out is slightly different: if the new key is invalid, > we never actually get to the point where the new authentication can be > started again. "nvme_auth_stop()" has already stopped the existing > authentication, and the parser returns an error before the restart > path is reached.> > So the question is whether writing an invalid replacement key should > leave the previous authentication stopped, or whether the key should > first be parsed/validated and only then replace the existing > authentication state.> > If the intended semantics are that an invalid key write should not > disturb an already running authentication, then moving the validation > before "nvme_auth_stop()" would make the operation effectively > transactional:> > validate new key > -> error: leave existing authentication unchanged > -> success: stop old authentication and start with new key > > If, however, the intended semantics are that any attempted replacement > stops the existing authentication even when the replacement is > invalid, then I agree that the current behaviour is intentional and > the patch doesn't fix a bug.> Hmm. Actually, I'm not sure. Both sides have something going for it. Stopping the transaction first follows the perceived will of the admin to start a new authentication. And that will is arguably independent on the question as to whether the new key is valid. But at the same time one cannot start a new authentication if the key is invalid. So I don't know. Let me think. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich