linux-kernel - Re: [tip: x86/build] x86/boot: Add back some padding for the CRC-32 checksum

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: <CAMj1kXEWerW9A7t0njN7hM7Ms48+mE94p3CTv_LP9P-CotOtPg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 16:07:53 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, 
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/build] x86/boot: Add back some padding for the CRC-32 checksum

On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 at 15:56, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 12:09:34PM -0000, tip-bot2 for Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > The following commit has been merged into the x86/build branch of tip:
> >
> > Commit-ID:     e471a86a8c523eccdfd1c4745ed7ac7cbdcc1f3f
> > Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/e471a86a8c523eccdfd1c4745ed7ac7cbdcc1f3f
> > Author:        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
> > AuthorDate:    Wed, 12 Mar 2025 09:12:05 +01:00
> > Committer:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> > CommitterDate: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 13:04:52 +01:00
> >
> > x86/boot: Add back some padding for the CRC-32 checksum
> >
> > Even though no uses of the bzImage CRC-32 checksum are known, ensure
> > that the last 4 bytes of the image are unused zero bytes, so that the
> > checksum can be generated post-build if needed.
>
> Sounds like it is not needed and sounds like we should whack this thing no?
>
> Or are we doing a grace period and then whack it when that grace period
> expires?
>

This was done on hpa's request - maybe he has a duration in mind for
this grace period?