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: Tue, 24 May 2016 18:56:59 -0400 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] sysctl: introduce uuid_le and uuid_be I'm also curious what !@#!? idiot came up with the concept of Little Endian UUID's. UUID's, and how to transform them from a printed representation to a binary presentation, were well defined in a very specific way in RFC-4122, which came from HP's Apollo/Domain OS, and was adopted by the OSF/DCE, as well as later by Microsoft. In all cases, there was never any such thing as little endian versus big endian UUID's. Might as well talk about big-endian and little endian IP addresses. This way lies madness. It's also the case that if all you need is a random UUID's, that *technically* the endianness matters, but in actual practice, it really won't matter. - Ted P.S. Let me guess, it was some clueless Intel engineer when they were drafting the EFI spec? Sigh....
Powered by blists - more mailing lists