| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4cefeab80705230439n6bbb1259le3c3b9704ce49b75@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 17:09:46 +0530 From: "Nitin Gupta" <nitingupta910@...il.com> To: "Michael-Luke Jones" <mlj28@....ac.uk> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Richard Purdie" <richard@...nedhand.com>, linux-mm-cc@...top.org Subject: Re: [RFC] LZO de/compression support - take 3 Hi Michael, On 5/23/07, Michael-Luke Jones <mlj28@....ac.uk> wrote: > On 23 May 2007, at 09:27, Nitin Gupta wrote: > > > This contains LZO1X-1 compressor and LZO1X decompressor (safe and > > standard version). > > I understand that the 'safe' decompression code is 'somewhat slower' > and that decompressor performance is a key feature of this algorithm. > However, I am concerned about the safety implications of including > the 'unsafe' standard version in-kernel when likely uses include > compression of network data, memory objects and so-on, all of which > could in theory be maliciously modified. > The 'unsafe' version is still included since in some scenarios we have guarantee that compressed data has not been modified (for e.g. where we keep compressed data in memory only). So, in those cases there is no need to go for slower 'safe' version. So, the version of decompressor selected should be left to the user (kernel dev) only - he should make sure that he is using the right version. Cheers, Nitin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists