linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] scripts: leaking_addresses: add support for 32-bit kernel addresses

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]

Date:   Tue, 28 Nov 2017 17:12:41 +0530
From:   Kaiwan N Billimoria <kaiwan.billimoria@...il.com>
To:     "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] scripts: leaking_addresses: add support for 32-bit
 kernel addresses

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Tobin C. Harding <me@...in.cc> wrote:
>
> At this stage I am unsure
> how best to convey my ideas back to you. It seems that adding 32 bit x86
> support is making a big enough change to the script that rather than you
> patching and me maintaining we could see it more as co-developing the
> patch.

That's just great! Thanks for the vote of confidence..

>I am in no way trying to take away from your changes, I'm happy
> for all work we end up with being applied with you as the author.
Of course not..

> If you are happy with this, I will email a patch to you (and CC
> kernel-hardening).
Yes..

>You could then look at it and see what things you
> like and what things you don't. Also I have not got access to a 32 bit
> x86 machine so it has not been tested. Once you are happy with it
> perhaps you could re-send as v3 and then I can apply it to the tree with
> you as the author.

Certainly, will do..

> The main aims of my changes to your patch are:
>
> 1. Keep inline with current script as much as possible.
> 2. Keep code as clean as possible (Perl can go to spaghetti really fast).
> 3. Try to keep the architecture stuff un-entangled, assuming more
>    architecture specific code will be needed in the future.
>
> And now I'll add a few comments inline intended to add clarity to my
> patch when it comes.

With even a quick glance, I can see you've definitely improved readability and
such...

> Thanks Kaiwan. If any of my methods are unclear or you don't like them
> please do say. I'm hear to learn also, we are shooting for the best
> Kernel possible.
Absolutely! Thanks again..
...

> I played around with these two subs for a while. Let me know what you
> think.
>
> thanks,
> Tobin.

Will look into your patch in detail and revert..

thanks v much,
Kaiwan.