linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Flag spam header (X-Spam-Report) to prevent spurious warnings

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: <1490249276.2041.19.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2017 23:07:56 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
Cc:     "John 'Warthog9' Hawley (VMware)" <warthog9@...lescrag.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Flag spam header (X-Spam-Report) to prevent
 spurious warnings

On Wed, 2017-03-22 at 23:01 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> I still haven't figured out why we test for this specific set of patterns. Why
> is a line that starts with a space and ends with a newline considered still
> in_header_lines. Or more specifically, why aren't we just testing for an empty
> line (RFC 5322 Section 2.1, defining the separation of headers and the body).

Because of the From: and commit: lines sometimes used to describe
patches sent on behalf of others.