linux-hardening - Re: [GIT PULL] overflow updates for v5.15-rc1

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:   Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:12:58 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overflow updates for v5.15-rc1

On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 03:27:31PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Linus,
> 
> On Sun, 5 Sep 2021 10:36:22 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 12:38 AM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeech. Yeah, no, that was not expected at all. I even did test merge builds against your latest tree before sending the Pull Request. This has been in -next for weeks, too.  
> > 
> > Sadly, I don't think linux-next checks for warnings.
> 
> Yes, I do.  And report them.  I did not get these warnings for some
> reason.  One of my builds is an X86_64 allmodconfig, currently using
> 
> x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc (Debian 10.2.1-6) 10.2.1 20210110

FWIW, the difference turned out to be LANG=C.UTF-8 in Fedora (vs LANG=C or
LANG=en_US.UTF-8), and the warning analysis being done in the self-tests
I added got unlucky when I tried to avoid setting "LANG". (i.e. I didn't
want to depend on matching English output, and used the trailing "'" in
the function name matcher -- which is a "`" under C.UTF-8.)

This has been fixed now -- I just got fantastically unlucky, it seems,
as literally only Linus appears to have been building with LANG=C.UTF-8.
(None of the other build bots warned about this for the weeks it's been
in -next). :(

-- 
Kees Cook