linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] exfat: redefine PBR as boot

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:   Fri, 29 May 2020 15:32:11 +0900
From:   Tetsuhiro Kohada <kohada.t2@...il.com>
To:     Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@...sung.com>
Cc:     kohada.tetsuhiro@...mitsubishielectric.co.jp,
        mori.takahiro@...mitsubishielectric.co.jp,
        motai.hirotaka@...mitsubishielectric.co.jp,
        'Namjae Jeon' <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] exfat: redefine PBR as boot_sector

>> I'll make another small patch, OK?
> 
> No, It make sense to make v3, because you have renamed the variables in
> boot_sector on this patch.

OK.


>> BTW
>> I have a concern about fs_name.
>> The exfat specification says that this field is "EXFAT".
>>
>> I think it's a important field for determining the filesystem.
>> However, in this patch, I gave up checking this field.
>> Because there is no similar check in FATFS.
>> Do you know why Linux FATFS does not check this filed?
>> And, what do you think of checking this field?
> 
> FATFS has the same field named "oem_name" and whatever is okay for its value.
> However, in case of exFAT, it is an important field to determine filesystem.
> 
> I think it would be better to check this field for exFAT-fs.
> Would you like to contribute new patch for checking it?

I already have the code, so I'll add it to [PATCH 2/4 v3].

BR