linux-kernel - Re: Hashed pointer issues

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: <CA+55aFxfc8C9Hx+eQZrnyYuwoOitFvMpmWkWMTeA4mNCgLaSiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:01:13 +0000
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     tcharding <me@...in.cc>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Subject: Re: Hashed pointer issues

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 12:16 PM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:

> I just noticed: there are _no_ users of get_random_bytes_arch() ...
> didn't we once use it to feed entropy to the CRNG?

We use arch_get_random_long() for that. See "crng_initialize()".

But if there are no actual users of get_random_bytes_arch(), maybe we can
just remove the fallback to the non-arch code, and add that return value
(and the __must_check()).

                    Linus