netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net: add more sanity checks to qdisc_pkt_len

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: <ZvRhYkwF4xL7tb-m@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:15:46 -0700
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	Jonathan Davies <jonathan.davies@...anix.com>,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net: add more sanity checks to
 qdisc_pkt_len_init()

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 09:01:23PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 8:55 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 8:24 PM Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > > git log --oneline --grep "sanity check" | wc -l
> > > > 3397
> > >
> > > I don't know what this means. We've done it in the past and so
> > > should continue to do it in the future? OK.
> >
> > This means that if they are in the changelogs, they can not be removed.
> > This is immutable stuff.
> > Should we zap git history because of some 'bad words' that most
> > authors/committers/reviewers were not even aware of?
> >
> > I would understand for stuff visible in the code (comments, error messages),
> > but the changelogs are there and can not be changed.
> >
> > Who knows, maybe in 10 years 'Malicious packet.' will be very offensive,
> > then we can remove/change the _comment_ I added in this patch.
> 
> BTW, I looked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanity_check
> and the non inclusive part is at the very end of it.
> 
> I would suggest moving it at the beginning of the article to clearly
> educate all potential users.

Stephen has provided what was needed, which was: guidance. The
guidance appears to be that code avoid this phrase, but commit
messages are of less concern.

This was not clear to me before, but it is very clear now and I have
learned something for future reviews.