linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Introduce a version6 of autofs interface, to fix design error.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 28 Apr 2012 09:56:24 +0800
From:	Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mjt@....msk.ru,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, autofs@...r.kernel.org,
	thomas@...3r.de, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Introduce a version6 of autofs interface, to fix
 design error.

On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 15:14 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 11:55:12 -0700
> 
> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> There's no question that systemd is broken.
> > 
> > Actually, I'll take that back.
> > 
> > Yes, systemd has breakage. But it's actually automount that is the
> > truly broken piece of sh*t.
> > 
> > I think that 'automount' is even more broken. The fact that the
> > automount maintainers knew about this, and added TOTALLY BROKEN code
> > to their automount source tree, over five years ago, because the
> > authors clearly did not understand what the f*ck they were doing,
> > that's the real problem.
> 
> I respectfully disagree.
> 
> It's ugly as shit, but it is the only one place where one can be
> absolutely sure that we are dealing with a pipe passing those v5
> things around.
> 
> All these hacks we have been talking about, assuming the mount means
> the pipe is for passing structure so-and-so around, and now trying
> to find some other check such as one on current->comm...
> 
> That's better?
> 
> Only the application really knows.  And I bet the person who wrote
> that automountd code you find so distasteful analyzed this and came
> to realize how difficult the kernel side would be to get right.

There's nothing I can say in my defense, Linus has made that very clear,
over and again.

When I realized the alignment mistake there were already shipping
binaries so I decided it was too late to change that.

And I see I got the analysis of the architectures alignment wrong, mmmm,
that's bad as well.

I guess I'll just be quiet now since anything I say is probably going to
be wrong.

Ian


--
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/