Hi Dave,
Can you please provide me with an example of an actual mdesc entry that
needs sanitization? I believe you are thinking of passwords and crypto
keys but I couldn't find any such entry on any machine I have access to.
It makes sense for this mdesc sysfs module to use the same level of
sanitization that has been used for so many years for /dev/mdesc without
any problem.
Regarding the machine description format specification url, what
specification document did you use or share with the community when you
initially wrote and upstreamed mdesc.c? Certainly the same document
could be used for this module as the format hasn't changed since then.
Thank you.
Kind Regards,
-eric
On 01/12/17 19:46, David Miller wrote:
From: Eric Saint Etienne <eric.saint.etienne@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 17:15:13 +0000
Do you have any concern with this patch?
I'm just wondering if the blacklist of sensitive nodes is complete and
also futureproof.
That's my first concern.
Also the hypervisor specification URL is completely non-functional,
the kenai.com stuff went down years ago.
It's pretty rediculous for me to include code written to a
specification nobody can access and check against the implementation.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
