linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Second set of 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]

Date:   Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:28:42 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Qiushi Wu <wu000273@....edu>,
        Wenwen Wang <wang6495@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Second set of revertion of all of the umn.edu commits

Hi!

> Maintainers, if you could take a look at these and see if the original
> was a valid commit or not, that would be most appreciated.  I'll be also
> doing a review of them as well.

> Thanks all for your help with this unexpected extra work...

We can do the extra work, but.. [and I have few reviews for the
original series but I believed it is not worth the noise].

Could you remind us why we are doing this extra work?

You are angry at unm.edu for some strange reason. They sent _three_
known-bad patches, and those are listed here:
https://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~kjlu/papers/full-disclosure.pdf . They
made sure those did not enter any git. Yes, that is slightly
questionable and they apologized. _But those were not even sent from
umn.edu addresses_.

The rest of their work is good. Yes, I found one useless patch, and
there are proably few more, but there's no indication those are evil,
and their error rate is pretty much "normal".

More importantly, it is pretty clear Sasha is pushing patches into
-stable without review. I don't see why that's tolerated, and effort
there would be more useful.

Please cc me if you decide to do any autogenerated reverts in
mainline. Because I don't believe that's okay thing to do.

Best regards,
								Pavel
-- 
http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)