linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] certs: Move load_system_certificate

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]

Message-Id: <9E194595-5A19-42F8-9657-7FB36DE59F16@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:15:10 -0600
From:   Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, masahiroy@...nel.org,
        michal.lkml@...kovi.net, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] certs: Move load_system_certificate_list to a common
 function


> On Sep 30, 2020, at 3:02 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 04:15:07PM -0400, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>> Move functionality within load_system_certificate_list to a common
>> function, so it can be reused in the future.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
> 
> I rather think now rather than the future. I think this should be part
> of a patch set where the re-use actually happens.

load_certificate_list is being used in the second patch in the series [1].
It uses the now common code, to load the revocation certificates, just like
the system certificates are being loaded in this patch.


> Without that context, I rather not say anything about this patch.
> Neither an issue for me if it gets applied. This is just a guideline
> that I follow (in order to manage this chaos).
> 
> Looking at the code change, I do not see anything strikingly wrong in
> it.

Thanks

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1315486/