linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage

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: <1486770571.2192.36.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Feb 2017 15:49:31 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
        Andew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage

(adding Emese Revfy and Julia Lawall)

On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 23:31 +0000, Roberts, William C wrote:
> The problem starts to get hairy when we think of how often folks roll their own logging macros (see some small sampling at the end).
> 
> I think we would want to add DEBUG DBG and sn?printf and maybe consider dropping the \b on the regex so it's a bit more matchy but still shouldn't
> end up matching on any ASM as you pointed out in the V2 nack.
> 
> Ill break this down into:
> 1. the patch as I know you'll take it, as you wrote it :-P
> 2. Adding to the logging macros
> 3. exploring making it less matchy

checkpatch is a line-oriented bunch of regexes
and doesn't know what is a __printf format.

It won't ever be "perfect" for this sort of
format verification checking.

Another way to do this is to write a gcc compiler
plugin that verifies the %p<foo> format types and
emits a warning/error.

That's probably the "best" solution.

Maybe coccinelle could help too.