linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] spi: pxa2xx: Add missed security checks

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: <CAHp75Vdb19w02zKHo1tqAtF8TmT=z6Ye2YFfxVw_TGtO3VxfLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Oct 2019 17:04:22 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@...il.com>
Cc:     Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
        Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
        Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: pxa2xx: Add missed security checks

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 2:37 PM Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 7:14 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 1:39 PM Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 5:35 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 8:59 AM Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@...il.com> wrote:

> > > > I'm not sure they are mandatory for all platforms.
> > > > To be on the safe side, you simple need to add _optional() to the both
> > > > call along with above change.
> > > >
> > >
> > > As I know, this is the only one in spi which does not have a check for
> > > devm_clk_get.
> >
> > For some it still may be optional. That's why better to check it and
> > mention in the commit message.
> >
> > > Even if add _optional(), they still may return errors and need security checks.
> >
> > Of course, see "along with" in my previous comment.
> >
>
> Got it. I will send version 2 in which both _optional() and security
> checks will be added.

Let me be clear. I didn't check if _optional() needed or not. You need
to investigate this before sending new verison.
And in either case this should be explained in commit message.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko