linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] char: misc: use octal permissions for the proc entry

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170418091102.GA17375@botnar.kaiser.cx>
Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2017 11:11:02 +0200
From:   Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] char: misc: use octal permissions for the proc
 entry

Thus wrote Greg Kroah-Hartman (gregkh@...uxfoundation.org):

> > ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
> > #285: FILE: drivers/char/misc.c:285:
> > +  ret = proc_create("misc", 0, NULL, &misc_proc_fops);

> Come on now, think about what this is saying.  Is 0 not also an octal
> number?

checkpatch is asking for a 4 digit octal number. And at least for me,
0444 makes it clearer what the permissions actually are. Yes, somewhere
in the code, I can dig up that 0 is changed to 0444...

> checkpatch requires you to use your brain, it is but a dumb perl
> script...

Sorry, I won't be arguing on a personal level.
If you don't like the patch, feel free to reject it. No problem for me.

Do you think checkpatch shouldn't be looking for exactly 4 digits here
(and elsewhere, it has a list of functions with a permission parameter)?

Best regards,

   Martin