linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] sysctl: introduce uuid_le and uuid

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160524225659.GA387@thunk.org>
Date:	Tue, 24 May 2016 18:56:59 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] sysctl: introduce uuid_le and uuid_be

I'm also curious what !@#!? idiot came up with the concept of Little
Endian UUID's.  UUID's, and how to transform them from a printed
representation to a binary presentation, were well defined in a very
specific way in RFC-4122, which came from HP's Apollo/Domain OS, and
was adopted by the OSF/DCE, as well as later by Microsoft.  In all
cases, there was never any such thing as little endian versus big
endian UUID's.  Might as well talk about big-endian and little endian
IP addresses.  This way lies madness.

It's also the case that if all you need is a random UUID's, that
*technically* the endianness matters, but in actual practice, it
really won't matter.

					- Ted

P.S.  Let me guess, it was some clueless Intel engineer when they were
drafting the EFI spec?  Sigh....