[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161205211227.4cc792d6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 21:12:27 +0000
From: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
minyard@....org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/39] Annotate module params that specify hardware
parameters (eg. ioport)
On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 16:02:26 +0000
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> > Also, I think Alan's comment about it the last time it came up was more like
> > a "look at all of the other ways you could do bad things to hardware!"
> > comment, not a "you need to also do this thing too!" type of request.
In all honesty I think both need to go in together, otherwise the first
patch is useless. It's not a case of "oh there may be another obscure
exploit .." , this is "I can automate it with a python script, post a
CVE, and show I'm awesome" 8)
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists