linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new TAINT_UNSIGNED

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:	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:58:18 +0000 (UTC)
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new
 TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Thomas
> Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, "David Howells" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
> "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 12:39:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
> 
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:55:36 +0000 (UTC)
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> > > To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> > > Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Ingo
> > > Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Thomas
> > > Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
> > > "David Howells" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
> > > "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 10:54:54 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new
> > > TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
> > > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > (keeping discussion for later, as I'm busy at a client site)
> >  
> > > For now, I'm going to push this in, and also mark it for stable.
> > 
> > Which patch or patches do you plan to pull, and which is marked for stable
> > ?
> 
> The one that I replied to. I can't pull the module patch unless I get
> an ack from Rusty.

Do you mean the internal API semantic change you propose for tracepoints ?
If yes, then how do you consider this a fix worthy of being backported to
stable ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> > 
> > This thread is a RFC PATCH. I posted a separate more complete patch in
> > a separate thread marked [PATCH].
> 
> Yeah, I'll post it out soon enough.
> 
> -- Steve
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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/