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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 10:41:34 +0000 From: Srinivasan Raju <srini.raju@...elifi.com> To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> CC: Mostafa Afgani <mostafa.afgani@...elifi.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS (WIRELESS)" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH] [v13] wireless: Initial driver submission for pureLiFi STA devices > That wasn't my point. My point was that the kernel code trusts the validity of the firmware image, in the sense of e.g. this piece: >> + no_of_files = *(u32 *)&fw_packed->data[0]; > If the firmware file was corrupted (intentionally/maliciously or not), this could now be say 0xffffffff. Thanks for the clarification, We will submit next patch with additional validations to this > What are your reasons for piggy-backing on 2.4 GHz? Just practical "it's there and we don't care"? As the LiFi is not standardised yet we are using the existing wireless frameworks. For now piggy-backing with 2.4GHz is seamless for users. We will undertake band and other wider change once IEEE 802.11bb is standardised. Thanks Srini
Powered by blists - more mailing lists