lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 29 Mar 2011 20:06:06 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Max Asbock <masbock@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Should corrected machine check errors still taint the kernel?

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 04:58:17PM -0700, Max Asbock wrote:
> I noticed that corrected machine check errors taint the kernel. And it
> looks like they have done that forever.
> 
> Is that still the right thing to do?

Likely not.

> 
> The comment in add_taint() says:
> "Can't trust the integrity of the kernel anymore."

The comment is definitely wrong agreed. 

-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ