linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode: Do not select FW

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]

Date:   Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:48:45 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode: Do not select FW_LOADER

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:41:13PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Adding two thousand lines of code to the kernel when you only need
> a few lines is ridiculous.  Worse those two thousand lines increase
> the attack surface to the kernel because they're exposed to user-
> space.

Why isn't *this* in your commit message?

> Adding a hidden Kconfig symbol for the sake of reducing the kernel
> attack surface would seem worthwhile.

And that.

> In fact this isn't even an issue right now because you are still using
> the custom function.

Actually, I'd prefer your version which doesn't depend on FW_LOADER at
all for the above reasons.

Please resubmit with amended commit message, adding the justification
for the change.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette