linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH wireless-next] wifi: mwifiex: Don't use %pK through printk

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]

Message-ID: <aAba8H-8KYZJeezS@google.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 16:55:28 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Cc: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Aleksandr Loktionov <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next] wifi: mwifiex: Don't use %pK through printk

On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 03:21:54PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> In the past %pK was preferable to %p as it would not leak raw pointer
> values into the kernel log.
> Since commit ad67b74d2469 ("printk: hash addresses printed with %p")
> the regular %p has been improved to avoid this issue.
> Furthermore, restricted pointers ("%pK") were never meant to be used
> through printk(). They can still unintentionally leak raw pointers or
> acquire sleeping looks in atomic contexts.
> 
> Switch to the regular pointer formatting which is safer and
> easier to reason about.
> There are still a few users of %pK left, but these use it through seq_file,
> for which its usage is safe.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
> Reviewed-by: Aleksandr Loktionov <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>

FWIW:

Acked-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>