lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] tpm: use SM3 instead of SM3_256
From
Date
Hi Jarkko,

On 10/12/21 11:21 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-10-09 at 21:08 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>> According to https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-oscca-cfrg-sm3-01.html,
>> SM3 always produces a 256-bit hash value and there are no plans for
>> other length development, so there is no ambiguity in the name of sm3.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
>
> This is not enough to make any changes because the commit message
> does not describe what goes wrong if we keep it as it was.
>
> /Jarkko
>

This did not cause an error, just to use a more standard algorithm name.
If it is possible to use the SM3 name instead of SM3_256 if it can be
specified from the source, it is of course better. I have contacted the
trustedcomputinggroup and have not yet received a reply.

Best regards,
Tianjia

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-14 11:46    [W:0.050 / U:0.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site