linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] lsm/lsm-pr-20240314

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: <CAHk-=wjXK3ZDtCM754mQVWzcZdQd50dBU5Y+AoATWcCGCMWzgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 16:05:06 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] lsm/lsm-pr-20240314

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 13:31, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
> I would like if you could merge these patches, I believe fixing the
> syscall signature problem now poses very little risk and will help us
> avoid the management overhead of compat syscall variants in the future.
> However, I'll understand if you're opposed, just let me know and I'll
> get you a compat version of this pull request as soon as we can get
> something written/tested/verfified.

No, attempting to just fix it after-the-fact in the hopes that nobody
actually uses the new system call yet sounds like the right thing to
do.

6.8 has been out for just days, and I see it's marked for stable, so
hopefully nobody ever even sees the mistake. I can't imagine that the
new system call is that eagerly used.

Famous last wods.

               Linus