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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 09:24:17 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Coco Li <lixiaoyan@...gle.com>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fortify: Provide a memcpy trap door for sharp corners On Tue, 10 May 2022 19:53:01 -0700 Kees Cook wrote: > As we continue to narrow the scope of what the FORTIFY memcpy() will > accept and build alternative APIs that give the compiler appropriate > visibility into more complex memcpy scenarios, there is a need for > "unfortified" memcpy use in rare cases where combinations of compiler > behaviors, source code layout, etc, result in cases where the stricter > memcpy checks need to be bypassed until appropriate solutions can be > developed (i.e. fix compiler bugs, code refactoring, new API, etc). The > intention is for this to be used only if there's no other reasonable > solution, for its use to include a justification that can be used > to assess future solutions, and for it to be temporary. > > Example usage included, based on analysis and discussion from: > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CANn89iLS_2cshtuXPyNUGDPaic=sJiYfvTb_wNLgWrZRyBxZ_g@mail.gmail.com Saeed, ack for taking this in directly? Or do you prefer to take this plus Eric's last BIG TCP patch via your tree?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists