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:   Sun, 2 Feb 2020 12:23:44 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Benjamin GAIGNARD <benjamin.gaignard@...com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
        Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@...com>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "system-dt@...ts.openampproject.org" 
        <system-dt@...ts.openampproject.org>,
        "lkml@...ux.net" <lkml@...ux.net>,
        "linux-imx@....com" <linux-imx@....com>,
        "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "fabio.estevam@....com" <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        "stefano.stabellini@...inx.com" <stefano.stabellini@...inx.com>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "Robin.Murphy@....com" <Robin.Murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Introduce bus firewall controller framework

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 12:48:33PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:

> Like Robin and Sudeep here, I do not understand why the kernel should
> have any business in this, let alone allowing blocks to change owners,
> that sounds contrary to the purpose of a firewall being controlled under
> an untrusted entity (Linux).

Can we rely on there being a more trusted level of software than
Linux on a system?  It wasn't standard to have anything on 32 bit
Arm systems as far as I remember so you could end up with some IP
blocks intended to support TrustZone sitting idle.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ