netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/smc: mark as BROKEN due to remote memory exposure

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: <1494788929.21774.1.camel@sandisk.com>
Date:   Sun, 14 May 2017 19:08:50 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To:     "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/smc: mark as BROKEN due to remote memory exposure

On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 11:51 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 07:58:48 +0200
> 
> > this patch has not been superceeded by anything, can you explain why
> > it has been marked as such in patchworks?
> 
> I think you're being overbearing by requiring this to be marked BROKEN
> and I would like you to explore other ways with the authors to fix
> whatever perceived problems you think SMC has.
> 
> You claim that this is somehow "urgent" is false.  You can ask
> distributions to disable SMC or whatever in the short term if it
> reallly, truly, bothers you.

Hello Dave,

There is agreement that the user-space API for using the SMC protocol must
be changed, namely by dropping AF_SMC and by making applications use the
SMC protocol through socket(AF_INET..., SOCK_STREAM, ...). What is your
plan to avoid that applications start using and depending on AF_SMC?

Thanks,

Bart.