linux-kernel - Re: [Fwd: Fwd: Re: Why is dynamic debug disabled for staging drivers ?]

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2011 11:55:25 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Roland Vossen <rvossen@...adcom.com>,
	devel <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Fwd: Re: Why is dynamic debug disabled for staging drivers
 ?]

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 02:41:59PM -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> The concern I would have in allowing tainted modules is that we are
> relying on a specific format for the dynamic debug section in the
> compiled module. For example, if a module was built with a format with an old
> section, we could potentially get confused. This can be solved with
> versioning, but that adds extra complexity. We can of course also make
> sure we don't change the format...

I wouldn't worry about that at all.  If you try to load a kernel module
that was not built against the kernel you are running, all bets are off
and lots of bad things can happen in other areas.

> Notice that tracepoints, which also rely on a specific module format,
> also employ a taint flag check.

Ok, but TAINT_CRAP shouldn't be part of that check, right?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/