netdev - Re: wireless extensions vs. 64-bit architectures

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: <1173382802.3248.68.camel@johannes.berg>
Date:	Thu, 08 Mar 2007 20:40:01 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Jouni Malinen <jkm@...icescape.com>
Cc:	jt@....hp.com, Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>, Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: wireless extensions vs. 64-bit architectures

On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 11:34 -0800, Jouni Malinen wrote:

> Yes, workaround in just iwlib is not enough. If the only possible
> solution is user space workaround, it better be documented (and
> communicated to maintainers of user space apps) well so that
> all user space programs not using iwlib can be modified, too.

The more I think about it the worse it gets. Think about wireless events
where both 32 and 64-bit userspace programs may be listening... That
means we can't even fix it in the kernel without breaking something.

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (191 bytes)