linux-kernel - Re: eCryptfs: Truncate path improvements

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 23 Jan 2012 10:57:15 -0600
From:	Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	ecryptfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, john.johansen@...onical.com,
	dustin.kirkland@...zang.com, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Li Wang <liwang@...t.edu.cn>
Subject: Re: eCryptfs: Truncate path improvements

On 2012-01-23 08:49:40, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com> wrote:
> > As Linus pointed out[1], eCryptfs needs more checks around its truncate path.
> > The first patch in this series makes it possible for an eCryptfs truncate
> > operation to be gracefully interrupted by a fatal signal. The second adds
> > checks for eCryptfs inode changes in setattr. The third is simply removal of
> > an old, unused function.
> 
> Tyler, should I take these patches directly? Or are these just for
> review and I should wait for a pull request?

Just for review, as I'll send a pull request.

I'll try to be more clear about that in the future.

Tyler

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)