linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Smackv10: Smack rules grammar + their stateful parser

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]

Message-ID: <1865922a0711051538n61c5d979kac61652166da14e2@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 6 Nov 2007 01:38:22 +0200
From:	"Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>
To:	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Pavel Machek" <pavel@....cz>,
	"Casey Schaufler" <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Al Viro" <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Smackv10: Smack rules grammar + their stateful parser

On 11/5/07, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 12:28:48PM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >
> > > Can we avoid string parsers in the kernel?
> > >
> >
> > Ok, Could someone suggest a better idea please ?.
>
> I personally think string parsers are *much* better than the alternatives
> (which basically boil down to nasty binary interfaces)
>
> > I thought about packing the rules in a structure and sending
> > it over an ioctl() command. Is this applicable ?
>
> That's *MUCH* worse.
>
> Strings are nice. They aren't that complex, and as long as it's not a
> performance-critical area, there are basically no downsides.
>
> Binary structures and ioctl's are *much* worse. They are totally
> undebuggable with generic tools (think "echo" or "strace"), and they are a
> total nightmare to parse across architectures and pointer sizes.
>
> So the rule should be: always use strings if at all possible and relevant.
> If the data is fundamentally binary, it shouldn't be re-coded to ascii (no
> real advantage), but if the data is "stringish", and there aren't big
> performance issues, then keep it as strings.
>

Thanks a lot for such a kind advice. I'll keep that in my mind.

Regards,

-- 
Ahmed S. Darwish
Homepage: http://darwish.07.googlepages.com
Blog: http://darwish-07.blogspot.com
-
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/