linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/mm] x86/mm: Warn on W^X mappings

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:	Thu, 8 Oct 2015 08:00:24 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, luto@...capital.net,
	peterz@...radead.org, sds@...ho.nsa.gov, keescook@...omium.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, efault@....de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, brgerst@...il.com, dvlasenk@...hat.com
Cc:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/mm] x86/mm: Warn on W^X mappings

On 10/8/2015 7:57 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> +		pr_info("x86/mm: Checked W+X mappings: passed, no W+X pages found.\n");
> Do we really want to issue anything here in the success case? IMO, we
> should be quiet if the check passes and only scream when something's
> wrong...

I would like the success message to be there.
 From an automated testing perspective (for the distro I work on for example),

"the test runs and it fails",
"the test runs and it passes" and
"the test has not run (because of a bug in the code or config file)"

are different outcomes, where the first and third are test failures,
but without the pr_info at info level, the 2nd and 3rd are indistinguishable.

--
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/