kernel-hardening - Re: [PATCH] scripts: Add intended executable mode and SPDX license

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200827130653.GA25408@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 15:06:53 +0200
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
	Mrinal Pandey <mrinalmni@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts: Add intended executable mode and SPDX license

[CC list trimmed]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:54:05PM +0530, Mrinal Pandey wrote:
>  mode change 100644 => 100755 scripts/gcc-plugins/gen-random-seed.sh

This is basically the only change relevant to the contribution initially
made via kernel-hardening, and in my opinion (and I am list admin) isn't
worth bringing to the list.  Now we have this bikeshed thread in here
(and I'm guilty for adding to it), and would have more (which I hope
this message of mine will prevent) if changes to something else in the
patch(es) are requested (which Greg KH sort of already did).

I recall we previously had lots of "similar" bikeshedding in here when
someone was converting the documentation to rST.  The more bikeshedding
we have, the less actual kernel-hardening work is going to happen,
because the list gets the reputation of yet another kernel maintenance
list rather than the place where actual/potential new contributions to
improve the kernel's security are discussed, and because bikeshedding
makes the most capable people unsubscribe or stop paying attention.

How about we remove kernel-hardening from the MAINTAINERS entries it's
currently in? -

GCC PLUGINS
M:      Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
R:      Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>
L:      kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
S:      Maintained
F:      Documentation/kbuild/gcc-plugins.rst
F:      scripts/Makefile.gcc-plugins
F:      scripts/gcc-plugin.sh
F:      scripts/gcc-plugins/

LEAKING_ADDRESSES
M:      Tobin C. Harding <me@...in.cc>
M:      Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>
L:      kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
S:      Maintained
T:      git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tobin/leaks.git
F:      scripts/leaking_addresses.pl

Alternatively, would this be acceptable? -

L:      kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com (only for messages focused on core functionality, not for maintenance detail)

I think the latter would be best, if allowed.

Kees, please comment (so that we'd hopefully not need that next time),
and if you agree please make a change to MAINTAINERS.

Mrinal, we appreciate your contribution, and the problem above isn't
yours - it's with the way MAINTAINERS doesn't fit this group well.

Thanks,

Alexander

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.