linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 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: <873d7e08-7a70-a1a3-f486-882d1d515965@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 15:59:21 -0600
From:   Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        willy@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, roman.fietze@...na.com,
        keescook@...omium.org, john.ogness@...utronix.de,
        akinobu.mita@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/vsprintf: make-printk-non-secret printks all
 addresses as unhashed

On 2/4/21 3:49 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> This machine is insecure. Yet I don't see ascii-art *** all around..
> 
> "Kernel memory addresses are exposed, which is bad for security."

I'll use whatever wording everyone can agree on, but I really don't see 
much difference between "which may compromise security on your system" 
and "which is bad for security".  "may compromise" doesn't see any more 
alarmist than "bad".  Frankly, "bad" is a very generic term.

I think the reason behind the large banner has less to do how insecure 
the system is, and more about making sure vendors and sysadmins don't 
enable it by default everywhere.