linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RESEND] lib/vsprintf: make-printk-non-secret printks all addresses as unhashed

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: <20210203154727.20946539@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 3 Feb 2021 15:47:27 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vbabka@...e.cz, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        willy@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, roman.fietze@...na.com,
        john.ogness@...utronix.de,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        akinobu.mita@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND] lib/vsprintf: make-printk-non-secret printks
 all addresses as unhashed

On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 12:35:07 -0800
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:

> > With a big notice that all pointers of unhashed, I don't think we need to
> > print it failed when we expect it to fail.
> > 
> > If anything, skip the test and state:
> > 
> >   test_printf: hash test skipped because "make-printk-non-secret" is on the
> >   command line.  
> 
> Yeah, I'm fine with "fail" or "skip". "pass" is mainly what I don't
> like. :)

Is there any printing of the tests being done? Looks to me that the tests
only print something if they fail. Thus "skip" and "pass" are basically the
same (if "skip" is simply not to do the test).

I mean, we could simply have:


 static void __init
 plain(void)
 {
 	int err;
 
+	if (debug_never_hash_pointers)
+		return;



-- Steve