linux-kernel - Re: [Qemu-devel] security implications of caching with virtio pmem (was Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] kvm "virtio pmem" device)

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:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 23:58:15 +0100
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>
Cc:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, dchinner@...hat.com,
        jack@...e.cz, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org,
        jasowang@...hat.com, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        adilger kernel <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, zwisler@...nel.org,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        dave jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        darrick wong <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        vishal l verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        willy@...radead.org, hch@...radead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        jmoyer@...hat.com, nilal@...hat.com, riel@...riel.com,
        stefanha@...hat.com, imammedo@...hat.com,
        dan j williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        lcapitulino@...hat.com, kwolf@...hat.com,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu,
        xiaoguangrong eric <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>,
        rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] security implications of caching with virtio pmem
 (was Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] kvm "virtio pmem" device)

On 11.02.19 23:29, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:29:46AM -0500, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
>> Hello Dave,
>> Are we okay with this?
> 
> Sure.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree with all the analysis presented, but, well, I
> haven't looked any deeper because I'm tired of being shouted at and
> being called argumentative for daring to ask hard questions about
> this topic....

I think if you have concerns, they should definitely be discussed.
Making people frustrated that review code is not what we want. Not at all.

I suggest that Pankaj properly documents what we found out so far about
security concerns and properly describes intended use cases and answers
other questions you had in the cover letter / documentation of the
follow up series.

Thanks Dave!

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.
> 


-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb