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]
Date:   Fri, 26 May 2017 01:24:48 -0500
From:   Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        sachinp <sachinp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-next] PPC Lpar fail to boot with error hid: module
 verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel

On 05/25/2017 04:24 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> On Thu, 25 May 2017 23:02:06 +1000 Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
>>
>> It'll be:
>>
>> ee35011fd032 ("initramfs: make initramfs honor CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT")
>
> And Andrew has asked me to drop that patch from linux-next which will
> happen today.

What approach do the kernel developers suggest I take here?

I would have thought letting it soak in linux-next for a release so
people could fix userspace bugs would be the next step, but this sounds
like that's not an option?

Is the behavior the patch implements wrong?

Rob

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ