linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: build kunit tests without structleak plugin

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, 29 Sep 2021 13:59:09 -0700
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, andreas.noever@...il.com,
        michael.jamet@...el.com,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        yehezkelshb@...il.com, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: build kunit tests without
 structleak plugin

On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 11:40 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 8:57 AM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > This isn't a stand-alone test object, so I'm less excited about
> > disabling STRUCTLEAK here.
>
> Yeah, please don't do this for things that aren't pure tests. You're
> now disabling security measures (even if I hate the gcc plugins and
> hope they will go away).

Oh, whoops, yeah, I shouldn't do that. I am just going to drop this
patch entirely, as I wasn't able to reproduce the stack frame size
issue on qemu anyway (as I mentioned on the cover letter).

Thanks for catching this.

Sorry!