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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2020 10:10:20 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add kvfree_sensitive() for freeing sensitive data objects On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 17:26 +0100, David Howells wrote: > Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote: > > > While I agree with Linus about the __ prefix, > > the z is pretty common and symmetric to all > > the <foo>zalloc uses. > > > > And if _sensitive is actually used, it'd be > > good to do a s/kzfree/kfree_sensitive/ one day > > sooner than later. > > How much overhead would it be to always use kvfree_sensitive() and never have > a kfree_sensitive()? Another possibility: Add yet another alloc flag like __GFP_SENSITIVE and have kfree operate on that and not have a kfree_sensitive at all.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists