linux-kernel - Re: VERIFY_READ/WRITE in uaccess.h?

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: <55511989.2010407@zytor.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 May 2015 14:05:13 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: VERIFY_READ/WRITE in uaccess.h?

On 05/10/2015 02:44 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> While cleaning up UML's uaccess code I've noticed that not a single architecture
> is using VERIFY_READ/WRITE in access_ok().
> One exception is UML, it uses the access type in one check which is in vain anyways.
> Also asm-generic/uaccess.h drops the type parameter silently.
> 
> Why do we still carry it around?
> 
> Is it because we want it for some future architecture which can benefit
> from it or just because nobody cared enough to do a tree-wide cleanup?
> I fear it is the latter... ;)
> 

Or, perhaps, nobody noticed?

	-hpa


--
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/