linux-kernel - Re: [GIT] Security subsystem changes for 3.14

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]

Date:	Tue, 21 Jan 2014 09:15:01 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>
Cc:	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT] Security subsystem changes for 3.14

Since I got a conflict on this one and had to look at the code:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:11 AM, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> wrote:
>
> Peter Huewe (5):
>       tpm/tpm_ppi: Check return value of acpi_get_name

that commit looks wrong (and mainline had fixed it correctly in the meantime).

The problem with

+       if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
+               return status;

is that this is a callback for acpi_walk_namespace(), and returning a
failure status means that the walk will be interrupted.

So you actually want to return AE_OK if the acpi_get_name() call
fails, because that just skips the failing node. Returning failure
will skip *all* the nodes.

In practice it probably doesn't matter (acpi_get_name() isn't supposed
to fail), but I thought I'd point it out since I had to stare at the
conflict.

                  Linus
--
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/