linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] kernel/sysctl: support setting sysctl parameters from kernel command line

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, 6 Apr 2020 08:58:50 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Ivan Teterevkov <ivan.teterevkov@...anix.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        "Guilherme G . Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...onical.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kernel/sysctl: support setting sysctl parameters
 from kernel command line

On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:08:36PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > Yes. Doing an internal extension isn't testing the actual code.
> 
> But it would.
> 
> [...]
> > I don't think anything is needed for this series. It can be boot tested
> > manually.
> 
> Why test it manually when it could be tested automatically with a new kconfig?

So, my impression is that adding code to the internals to test the
internals isn't a valid test (or at least makes it fragile) because the
test would depend on the changes to the internals (or at least depend on
non-default non-production CONFIGs).

Can you send a patch for what you think this should look like? Perhaps
I'm not correctly imagining what you're describing?

Regardless of testing, I think this series is ready for -mm.

-- 
Kees Cook