linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level page allocator

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: <20090530174644.GC20013@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 30 May 2009 19:46:44 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Larry H." <research@...reption.com>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, pageexec@...email.hu,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level page
	allocator


* Larry H. <research@...reption.com> wrote:

> On 10:57 Sat 30 May     , Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > Larry H. wrote:
> >> Furthermore, selective clearing doesn't solve the roots of the problem.
> >> It's just adding bandages to a wound which never stops bleeding. I
> >> proposed an initial page flag because we could use it later for
> >> unconditional page clearing doing a one line change in a header file.
> >> I see a lot of speculation on what works and what doesn't, but
> >> there isn't much on the practical side of things, yet. I provided test
> >> results that proved some of the comments wrong, and I've referenced
> >> literature which shows the reasoning behind all this. What else can I do
> >> to make you understand you are missing the point here?
> >
> > Hey, if you want to add a CONFIG_ZERO_ALL_MEMORY_PARANOIA thing that can be 
> > disabled, go for it! But you have to find someone else to take the merge 
> > the SLAB bits because, quite frankly, I am not convinced it's worth it. And 
> > the hand waving you're doing here isn't really helping your case, sorry.
> 
> For a second I thought it was Ingo who was writing this e-mail. 
> Apologies about the confusion.

btw., i find this is rather hillarious: you thought it was me 
writing the reply and you answered Pekka's arguments with contempt 
and hand-waving.

Now that you realized that it's the SLAB maintainer you replied to, 
whom you cannot just hand-wave away, you apologize not for the 
bogosity of your argument and not for the concept - but you 
apologize for _thinking it was the wrong person_.

That is a rather dishonest style of discussion.

	Ingo
--
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/