netdev - Re: syzcaller patch postings...

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: <CACT4Y+YUuH26+vfdurs2H-3gXnOvcJk32bPSHkvp9P6hs-XbiA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:21 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>
Subject: Re: syzcaller patch postings...

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:35 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 10:58:07 +0100
>
>> Do I understand it correctly that if syzbot replies to the CC list
>> that was in the testing request, it will resolve the problem? So if
>> netdev wasn't in CC, it will not be added to CC.
>>
>> I will go and fix it now.
>
> I don't want syzbot to send the patch to netdev, even if it
> was in the CC: list.
>
> And again this goes for netfilter-devel and linux-wireless as
> well.
>
> There is no reason whatsoever for syzbot to ever post an already
> posted patch back to the list again, even if it was on the CC:
> list.
>
> In fact netdev will be on that CC: list most of the time.


Hi David,

We've found a simple and reasonable solution with Daniel.
If we prefix subjects of these replies with "Re: " then Patchwork will
never treat them as new patches (always as a comment).
This is now implemented and deployed for syzbot:
https://github.com/google/syzkaller/commit/334641584880cd238fc32dc6f436e7e10efdf3de
So we now have 2 lines of defense for the problem never happening again.

Thanks for bringing it up.