linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 000/190] Revertion of all of the umn.edu commits

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: <YIJyzkgglMrAzIwh@kroah.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:10:06 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
        Qiushi Wu <wu000273@....edu>, x86@...nel.org,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 000/190] Revertion of all of the umn.edu commits

On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 09:01:26AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/04/2021 20:53, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-04-21 at 15:01 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:57:55PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>> I have been meaning to do this for a while, but recent events have
> >>> finally forced me to do so.
> >>>
> >>> Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in
> >>> "bad
> >>> faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review
> >>> "known
> >>> malicious" changes.  The result of these submissions can be found in
> >>> a
> >>> paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
> >>> entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing
> >>> Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu
> >>> (University
> >>> of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota).
> >>
> >> I noted in the paper it says:
> >>
> >>   A. Ethical Considerations
> >>
> >>   Ensuring the safety of the experiment. In the experiment, we aim to
> >>   demonstrate the practicality of stealthily introducing
> >> vulnerabilities
> >>   through hypocrite commits. Our goal is not to introduce
> >>   vulnerabilities to harm OSS. Therefore, we safely conduct the
> >>   experiment to make sure that the introduced UAF bugs will not be
> >>   merged into the actual Linux code
> >>
> >> So, this revert is based on not trusting the authors to carry out
> >> their work in the manner they explained?
> >>
> >> From what I've reviewed, and general sentiment of other people's
> >> reviews I've read, I am concerned this giant revert will degrade
> >> kernel quality more than the experimenters did - especially if they
> >> followed their stated methodology.
> > 
> > I have to agree with Jason.  This seems like trying to push a thumbtack
> > into a bulletin board using a pyle driver.  Unless the researchers are
> > lying (which I've not seen a clear indication of), the 190 patches you
> > have selected here are nothing more than collateral damage while you are
> > completely missing the supposed patch submission addresses from which
> > the malicious patches were sent!
> > 
> > This all really sounds like a knee-jerk reaction to thier posting.  I
> > have to say, I think it's the wrong reaction to have.
> 
> Nothing stops you from participating in the review of this
> revert-series, if you think these are valuable commits. Patches getting
> the review, won't be reverted (as I understood).

You understand correctly :)