linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] nvme: Don't add namespaces for locked drives

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]

Message-ID: <20160624081128.GD17446@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jun 2016 01:11:28 -0700
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
Cc:	Jethro Beekman <kernel@...ekman.nl>, axboe@...com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] nvme: Don't add namespaces for locked drives

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:26:39AM -0400, Keith Busch wrote:
> This is ATA security, though, so wouldn't ATA also benefit from this? The
> payload setup/decoding should then go in a generic library for everyone.

In principiple sharing this code would be fine, but right now the
actual ATA specific code is totally trivial.  Maybe we can have the
line of checking the actual data that we get from the ATA-specific
security send into a inline helper, but otherwise the to be shared bits
are mostly constants.

> Similar was said about the patch adding OPAL security to the NVMe driver:
> 
>   http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/2016-April/004428.html

OPAL is a lot more complex than checking this locked bit..