linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] efi: Avoid fortify checks in EFI stub

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: <CAKv+Gu_pk=_44p8dXkpqX5WE_ewje+mHPKZOcMscqw36qXuQ8g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Jun 2017 08:54:53 +0000
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] efi: Avoid fortify checks in EFI stub

On 7 June 2017 at 03:12, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 05:13:07PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> (+ Mark, Matt)
>>>
>>> On 6 June 2017 at 04:52, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>>> > This avoids CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE from being enabled during the EFI stub
>>> > build, as adding a panic() implementation may not work well. This can be
>>> > adjusted in the future.
>>> >
>>> > Suggested-by: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
>>> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>>> > Cc; Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
>>> > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
[...]
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> This is unlikely to conflict with anything going through the EFI tree,
>>> so feel free to queue it elsewhere.
>
> If it can go through the EFI tree, that'd be great. Less for akpm to wrangle. :)
>

That is fine, but I'd prefer not to take a single patch out of
context. Do you have a link to the entire series? I was only cc'ed on
this patch (In the future, please cc me on the entire series in cases
such as these.)