linux-kernel - Re: RFC: Revert move default dialect from CIFS to to SMB3

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:   Thu, 31 Aug 2017 17:12:09 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
Cc:     Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: Revert move default dialect from CIFS to to SMB3

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info> wrote:
> Lo! To give a bit more background to this (the mail I reply to was the
> first I sent with git send-email and I missed some details): Maybe I'm
> over stretching my abilities/position as regression tracker with this
> RFC for a revert, but I hope it at least triggers a discussion if such a
> revert should be done or not.

I don't think that a revert is appropriate.

But perhaps just a single printk() or something if the user does *not*
specify the version explicitly? Just saying something like

  We used to default to 1.0, we now default to 3.0, if you want old
defaults, use "vers=1.0"

Oh, looking at that version parsing code, I think we also need to fix
that legacy "ver=1" thing (ver without the 's') which now silently
ignores "ver=1" as being the "default", even though it's not.

I do *not* believe that "default to version 1" is acceptable.

                Linus