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  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]
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2017 09:09:19 -0700
From:   Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
        Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@...il.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <Mario_Limonciello@...l.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: WMI Enhancements

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 08:44:28AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday 13 April 2017 17:32:48 Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl>
> >> wrote:
> >> > What we still need, though, is an open source version of
> >> > wmiofck.exe.  I am unaware of anything like that existing and
> >> > installing the Windows Driver Kit just to run one command which
> >> > spits out a single *.h file is not something I would describe as
> >> > convenient (been there).
> >>
> >> I haven't tried to see whether they do what's needed, but there's
> >> OpenWBEM and OpenPegasus.
> >>
> >> Anyway, if such a tool exists, it would be handy to expose the binary
> >> MOF data to userspace so the tool could be used to help get WMI
> >> working on new platforms.
> >
> > In this case, when WMI stay in kernel, MOF data could be exported via
> > debugfs? I think there is no need to have them in sysfs stable ABI. As
> > above usage (get WMI working on new platforms) looks like for debugging
> > purpose.
> >
> 
> That's a reasonable point.
> 

Also agreed.

-- 
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center

Powered by blists - more mailing lists