Harald Welte laforge at
Sun Nov 3 14:00:09 UTC 2013

Hi Kevin,

On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 07:02:12PM +0100, Kevin Redon wrote:
> I tested the reserved COMP128v23 code from

Thanks, I didn't even know that there was now a publicly-documented,
publicly-leaked vresion of COMP128v2/v3 available.  This of course means
that nobody can claim the algorithm is a trade secret anymore, and thus
I don't see problems with us implementing it in libosmocore for
subsequent use in other osmocom projects like osmo-nitb, etc.

> I then checked the output from osmo-auc-gen again the values provided
> also the python code and all values matched


> WARNING: I also renamed COMP128 to COMP128v1, but don't know if this
> breaks any compatibility with other projects

Exactly to avoid that, I would simply skip it.  I know it's sort-of
strange that comp128 refers to v1 without explicitly stating it, but I
think for the sake of simplicitly we should keep it.

Finally, I hope somebody will have enough reason of porting osmo-nitb
over to the generic osmo_auth API in libosmocore, rather than calling
the comp128[v1] algorithm directly.  At that point, COMP128v2/v3 as well
as milenage support will come more or less automagically.

Afer that, we could probably resort to not exporting the comp128()
functions directly anymore, but require all users to go through the
osmo_auth_* API.


- Harald Welte <laforge at> 
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
                                                  (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)

More information about the baseband-devel mailing list