linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vfs: Don't reject unknown parameters

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, 12 Dec 2019 09:56:39 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jeremi Piotrowski <jeremi.piotrowski@...il.com>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Phillip Lougher <phillip@...ashfs.org.uk>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Don't reject unknown parameters

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 9:47 AM Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Good point, I think I missed how that code flow worked for printing
> out the error. I debated putting in a dummy parse_param but I
> figured that squashfs wouldn't be the only fs that didn't take
> arguments (it's in the minority but certainly not the only one).

I think printing out the error part is actually fine - it would act as
a warning for invalid parameters like this.

So I think a dummy parse_param that prints out a warning is likely the
right thing to do.

Something like the attached, perhaps? Totally untested.

               Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (788 bytes)