netdev - Re: private netdev flags into UAPI?

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: <50B462F0.1070506@mellanox.com>
Date:	Tue, 27 Nov 2012 08:51:28 +0200
From:	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
CC:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: private netdev flags into UAPI?

On 27/11/2012 04:03, David Howells wrote:
> Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:22 AM, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> They were exposed to userspace already
>> So the script carries the bug into a new directory... why? AFAIK,
>> intentionally there's no way to read private flags from user space, so
>> what's the point in defining them there?
> How should the script know what's private and what's not?  By the
> encapsulation of code inside __KERNEL__ blocks.  In their absence, everything
> is assumed to be public - given it is already part of the UAPI.  I don't know
> that the code is private rather than the comment is wrong.
>
>

makes sense, but I have pointed on a bug in the final result, so this 
way or another, the fact that the bug
existed before doesn't mean we should carry it over.

Or.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html