linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify

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]

Message-ID: <1369382613.1945.19.camel@dabdike>
Date:	Fri, 24 May 2013 12:03:33 +0400
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tj@...nel.org,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
	Doug Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to
 blk_verify_command

On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 09:53 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 24/05/2013 09:50, James Bottomley ha scritto:
> > On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 09:43 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 24/05/2013 09:36, James Bottomley ha scritto:
> >>> On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 15:58 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>>> Adjust the blk_verify_command function to let it look at per-queue
> >>>> data.  This will be done in the next patch.
> >>>
> >>> This is not a bug fix.  This is an enabler for your complex and to my
> >>> mind dubious rework of the SG_IO command filter.  I'm running out of
> >>> ways to say please don't mix bug fixes with features, because this
> >>> redesignating of the original patch set as part 1 and parts 2,3 doesn't
> >>> satisfy the requirement.
> >>
> >> I made it part 1/2/3 because parts 2/3 depend on part 1.  It makes
> >> dependency tracking easier, at least in my mind.
> >>
> >> If you have another solution that does not require passing request_queue
> >> to blk_verify_command, I'm all ears.
> > 
> > That's a circular response that doesn't answer the question.  The actual
> > question is: what is simple fix for the bug that isn't entangled with
> > enabling the SG_IO per device type whitelist feature.
> > 
> >>> Does anyone in the real world actually care about this bug?
> >>
> >> Yes, or I would move on and not waste so much time on this.
> > 
> > Fine, so produce a simple fix for this bug which we can discuss that's
> > not tied to this feature.
> 
> Honestly, I have no idea how this is even possible.

Really?  It looks to me like a simple block on the commands for disk
devices in the opcode switch would do it (with a corresponding change to
sg.c:sg_allow_access).

James


--
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/