linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] efivarfs: Limit the rate for non-root to read files

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, 22 Feb 2018 10:07:23 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Joe Konno <joe.konno@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        James Bottomley <james.bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] efivarfs: Limit the rate for non-root to read files

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:
> With the new "while/nap" change there would still be one message
> per second, but the number of callbacks suppressed should be 1
> (unless the user has many threads doing reads).
>
> Maybe it is good to know that an application is doing something
> stupid and we should drop that line from the patch and let the
> warnings flow?

I think the "one message per second" is fine.

Looks good. Do I get this through the EFI tree, or should I just take
it directly?

               Linus