linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] Explain panic() calls for keyring initialization

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:55:25 +0100
From:   Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] Explain panic() calls for keyring initialization


On 21/03/2022 19:29, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-03-21 at 18:45 +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>
>> Mickaël Salaün (1):
>>    certs: Explain the rational to call panic()
> 
> Nit: "rationale". Even in Simplified English, I believe "rational" is a
> completely different word.

Right, "rational" is an adjective.


> 
>>   certs/blacklist.c | 8 ++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> Also, isn't it about time we changed this to call it a denylist?
> 

It is important to note that this word is part of the kernel ABI because 
of the keyring name.