linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] stmmac: Add support for SIMATIC IOT2000 platform

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: <CAHp75Vd=TkJXnDYqctKCzRGvMX_Zt0i5eH8GcBz44e-T93aJ0A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Apr 2017 14:42:22 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc:     Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sascha Weisenberger <sascha.weisenberger@...mens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stmmac: Add support for SIMATIC IOT2000 platform

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
> On 2017-04-25 12:07, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2017-04-25 11:46, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2017-04-25 09:30, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2017-04-24 23:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:

>>>        {
>>>                .name = "SIMATIC IOT2000",
>>>                .func = 6,
>>>                .phy_addr = 1,
>>>        },
>>>        {
>>>                .name = "SIMATIC IOT2000",
>>>                .func = 7,
>>>                .phy_addr = 1,
>>>        },
>>>
>>> That's all what you need.
>>
>> Nope. Again: the asset tag is the way to tell both apart AND to ensure
>> that we do not match on future devices.

> To be more verbose: your version (which is our old one) would even
> enable the second, not connected port on the IOT2020. Incorrectly.

So, name has 2000 for 2020 device? It's clear bug in DMI table you have. :-(

What else do you have in DMI which can be used to distinguish those devices?

> Plus
> the risk to match different future devices.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko