linux-kernel - Re: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Recommend denylist/allowlist instead of blacklist/whitelist

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:   Thu, 11 Jun 2020 09:38:04 +0200
From:   SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:     SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <apw@...onical.com>, SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de>,
        <colin.king@...onical.com>, <sj38.park@...il.com>,
        <jslaby@...e.cz>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Recommend denylist/allowlist instead of blacklist/whitelist

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:35:24 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 08:25 +0200, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de>
> > 
> > This patchset 1) adds support of deprecated terms in the 'checkpatch.pl'
> > and 2) set the 'blacklist' and 'whitelist' as deprecated with
> > replacement suggestion of 'denylist' and 'allowlist', because the
> > suggestions are incontrovertible, doesn't make people hurt, and more
> > self-explanatory.
> 
> While the checkpatch implementation is better,
> I'm still very "meh" about the whole concept.

I can understand your concerns about politic things in the second patch.
However, the concept of the 'deprecated terms' in the first patch is not
political but applicable to the general cases.  We already had the commits[1]
for a similar case.  So, could you ack for at least the first patch?

[1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-Kernel-Hugs


Thanks,
SeongJae Park