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  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]
Date:   Thu, 12 May 2022 01:42:26 -0700
From:   Saeed Mahameed <>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <>
Cc:     Kees Cook <>,
        Leon Romanovsky <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Paolo Abeni <>,
        Coco Li <>,
        Tariq Toukan <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fortify: Provide a memcpy trap door for sharp corners

On 11 May 09:24, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>On Tue, 10 May 2022 19:53:01 -0700 Kees Cook wrote:
>> As we continue to narrow the scope of what the FORTIFY memcpy() will
>> accept and build alternative APIs that give the compiler appropriate
>> visibility into more complex memcpy scenarios, there is a need for
>> "unfortified" memcpy use in rare cases where combinations of compiler
>> behaviors, source code layout, etc, result in cases where the stricter
>> memcpy checks need to be bypassed until appropriate solutions can be
>> developed (i.e. fix compiler bugs, code refactoring, new API, etc). The
>> intention is for this to be used only if there's no other reasonable
>> solution, for its use to include a justification that can be used
>> to assess future solutions, and for it to be temporary.
>> Example usage included, based on analysis and discussion from:
>Saeed, ack for taking this in directly? Or do you prefer to take this
>plus Eric's last BIG TCP patch via your tree?

Please take both, I asked Eric a question on the BIG TCP patch, but I
won't block the series.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists