lkrg-users - Re: LKRG unfit for installation by default in Whonix / Kicksecure due to kernel boot console output

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

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

Message-ID: <20200423170140.GA20771@pi3.com.pl>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:01:40 +0200
From: Adam Zabrocki <pi3@....com.pl>
To: lkrg-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: LKRG unfit for installation by default in Whonix /
 Kicksecure due to kernel boot console output - usability issue

Hi Patrick,

Currently, we are heavily working on rewriting entire communication-channel 
(sysctl interface) and new LKRG version. I will try to address that issue with 
the same batch of changes.

Thanks,
Adam

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 04:45:09PM +0000, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> I am already using kernel parameter "quiet loglevel=0" and sysctl
> "kernel.printk = 3 3 3 3". (These are generally working but not helping
> with LKRG.)
> 
> Messages seen during boot are similar as these:
> 
> sudo dmesg | grep -i lkrg
> 
> [    5.382817] [p_lkrg] Loading LKRG...
> [    5.864095] [p_lkrg] LKRG initialized successfully!
> [    6.118039] [p_lkrg] ALERT !!! FOUND LESS[1] MODULES IN DB IN MODULE
> LIST[39] THAN IN CURRENT MODULE LIST[40]
> [    6.118231] [p_lkrg] EXTRA MODULE:
> [    6.118477] [p_lkrg] ** EXTRA MODULE IS THE SAME AS ON-GOING MODULE
> ACTIVITY EVENTS **
> [    6.118646] [p_lkrg] ALERT !!! FOUND LESS[1] MODULES IN DB IN
> KOBJ[39] THAN IN CURRENT KOBJ[40]
> [    6.118739] [p_lkrg] EXTRA MODULE:
> [    6.118978] [p_lkrg] ** EXTRA MODULE IS THE SAME AS ON-GOING MODULE
> ACTIVITY EVENTS *
> 
> Problem is that due to use of all upper case, ALERT, "!!!" and otherwise
> language which laymen doesn't understand this would generate a lot
> unnecessary fear, uncertainty, doubt, support requests and imo
> unjustified badmouthing of the project due to a scary looking kernel
> boot console output.
> 
> I guess what LKRG is doing is writing to dmesg with level 0
> (KERN_EMERG). Therefore, my feature request is...
> 
> Could you please make LKRG use a lower dmesg loglevel such as 2
> (KERN_CRIT) (probably not) or 4 (KERN_WARNING)? I am not arguing much
> about which log level but please not 0 (KERN_EMERG). Or if it's not
> dmesg loglevel some other way to hide these messages from kernel boot
> console output.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Patrick

-- 
pi3 (pi3ki31ny) - pi3 (at) itsec pl
http://pi3.com.pl

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