linux-kernel - Re: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <859019.1583159423@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 02 Mar 2020 14:30:23 +0000
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        metze@...ba.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, cyphar@...har.com,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?

Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> wrote:

> Regarding open flags, I think the key point for future APIs is to avoid
> using the set of flags for both control of the operation itself
> (O_NOFOLLOW/AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW, O_NOCTTY) and properaties of the
> resulting descriptor (O_RDWR, O_SYNC).  I expect that doing that would
> help code that has to re-create an equivalent descriptor.  The operation
> flags are largely irrelevant to that if you can get the descriptor by
> other means.

It would also be nice to sort out the problem with O_CLOEXEC.  That can have a
different value, depending on the arch - so it excludes at least three bits
from the O_* flag set.

David