linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] oid_registry: allow arbitrary size OIDs

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: <6650f9cdb0aa51068a9df452d53e35ea15e44cbd.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 17:03:10 -0500
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton
	 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Blaise Boscaccy
	 <bboscaccy@...ux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oid_registry: allow arbitrary size OIDs

On Tue, 2025-11-25 at 20:35 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > How big a problem is this in shipped kernels?  Should we backport
> > it?
> 
> Not really much of a problem.  The OIDs that get compiled are all
> listed in include/linux/oid_registry.h.  External forces can't add
> new ones dynamically.

Agreed, this only came to light because I was trying to add a 2.25 OID.
What's currently there is all under 32 bit, never mind 64 bit, so no
need to backport.

James