linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 3/3] net: lan743x: Address problems with wake option flags configuration sequences

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: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 22:40:39 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Ronnie.Kunin@...rochip.com
Cc: Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bryan.Whitehead@...rochip.com, richardcochran@...il.com,
	UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 3/3] net: lan743x: Address problems with wake option
 flags configuration sequences

> I understand that the TI devices give the *impression* of supporting
> both, but based on what I explained above, even if you accept
> WAKE_MAGIC and WAKE_MAGICSEGURE on a set and report them both back
> as enabled on a get; whatever behavior your hardware does will not
> be fully compliant to both specs simultaneously anyway. I discussed
> this with Raju and what we decided to do for our driver/device is
> that if you pass both WAKE_MAGIC and WAKE_MAGICSEGURE flags to us we
> will report them back as both being enabled in a subsequent get as
> you suggested, but the behavior of our driver/hardware will be as if
> you had only enabled WAKE_MAGIC.

So i agree having WAKE_MAGIC and WAKE_MAGICSECURE at the same time
seems very odd. So i see no real problem limiting the driver to only
one or the other. However, if the user does ask for both, i would say
silently ignoring one is incorrect. You should return -EOPNOTUPP to
make it clear you don't support both at the same time.

I would also say that silently ignore the Secure version is probably
the worst choice. Things should be secure by default...

     Andrew