linux-kernel - Re: [ 01/82] Bluetooth: Always compile SCO and L2CAP in Bluetooth Core

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: <1353009872.4867.68.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:04:32 +0000
From:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, gustavo@...ovan.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	ulisses@...fusion.mobi, marcel@...tmann.org,
	Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...nbossa.org>
Subject: Re: [ 01/82] Bluetooth: Always compile SCO and L2CAP in Bluetooth
 Core

On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 21:38 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 04:30:44PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>
> > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:24:26 -0200
> > 
> > > Hi Ben,
> > > 
> > > * Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> [2012-11-14 05:39:34 +0000]:
> > > 
> > >> 3.2-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> > >> 
> > >> ------------------
> > >> 
> > >> From: Ulisses Furquim <ulisses@...fusion.mobi>
> > >> 
> > >> commit f1e91e1640d808d332498a6b09b2bcd01462eff9 upstream.
> > >> 
> > >> The handling of SCO audio links and the L2CAP protocol are essential to
> > >> any system with Bluetooth thus are always compiled in from now on.
> > > 
> > > I wonder if this could not break any kind of script or code people have that
> > > refer directly to the sco and l2cap modules. Also I don't see this change as
> > > really necessary for 3.2.
> > 
> > Agreed, I wish this had not been merged into -stable, I would have never
> > submitted a patch like this myself.
> 
> This is required by:
> 
> commit ff03261adc8b4bdd8291f1783c079b53a892b429
> Author: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...nbossa.org>
> Date:   Thu Aug 23 21:32:44 2012 -0300
> 
>     Bluetooth: Fix sending a HCI Authorization Request over LE links
>     
>     commit d8343f125710fb596f7a88cd756679f14f4e77b9 upstream.
> 
> which was already applied.

So, do you think it's better to revert that in 3.2, or to go ahead with
this?

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
friends: People who know you well, but like you anyway.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)