From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from jabberwock.ucw.cz (jabberwock.ucw.cz [46.255.230.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63A4367C7B for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.255.230.98 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709201014; cv=none; b=CmohpyNDsa0uupOG3FL4jC8Om75sZxrxeD+tfuFvTzhkBbfE4kU0SCLHZR0C3DZHhZCcH/XQr6AFzsyPtAi/9O+rezOeJ/eJLRO31wwQu/95JaLAgz4cjPi/q0UThyPQkpjkDnAgZmskaMnwjtUn2fi/TFCrr3+bgiD3rdMD2RA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709201014; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rSH0d6zWPJytEOsKlLvgp1AY6v9GhVoFa6M9ZJvqvIg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=aCcluf+mS3Nt0bBOY1dGq/nqlgHGU/qefDoUqn7fJs/R+Kpp56jcSO3fdf1Sr2B/S5oqUo9ceUlB1OVJ2uOwH5f4rdWNaFLpv4NPjH1Dh3NuFXx6pruIUaoOXk2tw/IwsMae75RUeVmCr5ArCX8EXXWAHMpTxHrvDTNNynW2/ZQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ucw.cz; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ucw.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ucw.cz header.i=@ucw.cz header.b=J7ys5Cg1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.255.230.98 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ucw.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ucw.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ucw.cz header.i=@ucw.cz header.b="J7ys5Cg1" Received: by jabberwock.ucw.cz (Postfix, from userid 1017) id 759581C0071; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 11:03:29 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ucw.cz; s=gen1; t=1709201009; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ao+TgHUmYIZPruHwTWaSp0gqdF1hMMpqCF/XlSbQdTM=; b=J7ys5Cg1/8k5404jABVl7pP6LNeFWFyOjK4EeP0r95Kvy63zGJwcU6+a1+9dmtDIv7pedM Mz5utZFleK8gtnL6FONYcXsuJMwAiM3XhKJipwgm7xlF5rdxdoBKh2czfY1zjfSeTvCqkq Fszoo8qAAUB7shHHJmBE5H9eLMYHY20= Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 11:03:28 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Michal Hocko , Kees Cook , cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: CVE-2023-52451: powerpc/pseries/memhp: Fix access beyond end of drmem array Message-ID: References: <2024022257-CVE-2023-52451-7bdb@gregkh> <2024022639-wronged-grafted-6777@gregkh> <202402271029.FD67395@keescook> <202402280906.D6D5590DB@keescook> <2024022915-dissuade-grandson-ebd4@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="589ZECv5K4/DtYSN" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2024022915-dissuade-grandson-ebd4@gregkh> --589ZECv5K4/DtYSN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu 2024-02-29 09:35:28, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 09:22:51AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 28-02-24 09:12:15, Kees Cook wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 01:04:14PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Tue 27-02-24 10:35:40, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 04:25:09PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > Does that mean that any potentially incorrect input provided by= an admin is > > > > > > considered CVE now? > > > > >=20 > > > > > Yes. Have you seen what USER_NS does? There isn't a way to know h= ow > > > > > deployments are using Linux, and this is clearly a "weakness" as = defined > > > > > by CVE. It is better to be over zealous than miss things. > > > >=20 > > > > If we are over zealous to the point when almost any fix is marked C= VE > > > > then the special marking simply stops making any sense IMHO. > > >=20 > > > Perhaps, but the volume of fixes is high, and I think it's better to > > > over estimate than under estimate -- the work needed to actually > > > evaluate all these changes is huge: it's better to take everything fr= om > > > -stable. > >=20 > > This is simply not feasible for many downstream kernels and reasons have > > been discussed many times. >=20 > How does taking 10 patches differ from taking 200 patches? Your > testing/infrastructure issues should be the same, right? It is more work to review 200 patches than to review 10. As you would know if you actually reviewed -stable patches or at least AUTOSEL ones. Pavel --=20 People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates. --589ZECv5K4/DtYSN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRPfPO7r0eAhk010v0w5/Bqldv68gUCZeBWcAAKCRAw5/Bqldv6 8uazAJwNkS7DKDojDXHxbjiWob0iiRvr7gCffQwppbhkk0+4GAih54Ow1rkZhyM= =1Ya4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --589ZECv5K4/DtYSN--