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  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, 2 Feb 2022 19:18:04 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <>,
        Nathan Chancellor <>,
        George Burgess IV <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4 v5] fortify: Add Clang support

On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 01:27:11PM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 4:30 PM Kees Cook <> wrote:
> >
> > +#define BOS    const __pass_object_size(1)
> > +#define BOS0   const __pass_object_size(0)
> A dumb bikeshed, but would you mind naming these BOS1 and BOS0, and
> perhaps consider adding a comment or pointer or link to something that
> describes why we use the two different modes?  I recognize that the
> code already uses the two different modes already without comments,
> but this might be a nice place to point folks like myself to so that
> in a month or so when I forget what the difference is between modes
> (again), we have a shorter trail of breadcrumbs.

Sure, I can do that. My expectation was to entirely eliminate mode 0
usage in the future.

Though now that things are so close, I'll just do some builds with the
last few users switched over. But maybe memcmp() was a pain? I'll go

Kees Cook

Powered by blists - more mailing lists