| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 07:11:12 +0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> CC: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Romain Francoise <romain@...bokech.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.32.60 On 10/11/2012 07:31 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 07:58:04PM +0900, Greg KH wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 08:29:16AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: >>> If you think these patches constitute a regression, I can revert them. >>> However I'd like convincing arguments since they're here to help address >>> a real issue. >> >> If I missed these when doing the random number generation backport for >> 3.0, and I should add them there as well, please let me know. > > At least I think they should not be in 2.6.32 without being in 3.0. > Probably that Peter's opinion will help us decide whether they should > go into 3.0 or 2.6.32 should revert them. > I would strongly argue for at least one of the RDRAND-enabling versions being in all supported kernels; the second (with Ted Ts'o's changes) is better, but touches a *lot* of subsystems; the plain one is self-contained but only helps RDRAND-enabled hardware. Without these patches the random subsystem has a critical security flaw, which puts it into the scope for stable. -hpa -- 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