linux-kernel - RE: RFC: WMI Enhancements

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: <2aa696fd37b24c2ca18fc9f30b664ab1@ausx13mpc120.AMER.DELL.COM>
Date:   Mon, 8 May 2017 19:11:57 +0000
From:   <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com>
To:     <dvhart@...radead.org>
CC:     <a.bokovoy@...il.com>, <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        <luto@...nel.org>, <pali.rohar@...il.com>, <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        <len.brown@...el.com>, <corentin.chary@...il.com>,
        <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: RFC: WMI Enhancements

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvhart@...radead.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 2:09 PM
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@...l.com>
> Cc: a.bokovoy@...il.com; andy.shevchenko@...il.com; luto@...nel.org;
> pali.rohar@...il.com; rjw@...ysocki.net; len.brown@...el.com;
> corentin.chary@...il.com; andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> pm@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: WMI Enhancements
> 
> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 06:26:53PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@...l.com wrote:
> > (Responding as plain text, your email probably got punted from the ML from
> being HTML)
> >
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what you are asking about. Samba does not deal with WMI at all.
> The state of affairs is
> > > explained at https://powershell.org/2015/04/24/management-information-
> the-omicimwmimidmtf-dictionary/
> > > -- old WMI (DCOM/RPC-based) is deprecated, new WMI based on WS-MAN is
> supported and OMI is the
> > > implementation. We used to have a very limited attemt at writing DCOM stack
> and nobody worked on
> > > it for years so it got removed.
> >
> > Thanks!  That was a very interesting read.
> >
> > > Microsoft has already published a MOF parser as part of OMI work:
> https://github.com/Microsoft/omi/
> > > under MIT license.
> >
> > Unfortunately that's expecting text MOF, not this intermediary compiled format.
> >
> 
> I presume which of these to use is the decision of the vendor? 

No, MS documentation indicates to store binary MOF in the ACPI buffer.

>Is there a
> transition going on from BMOF to Text MOF? Or will both be part of products for
> the near term?
> 

Binary MOF will be part of products unless MS or a standards group decides to 
announce something new for OEM's to use in this space.

> I'm trying to understand if BMOF is a legacy thing now, or if it will continue
> to be used in new designs.

Should be continued to use in new designs.