From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Wed Jun 20 16:49:05 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B99911023C87; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:49:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hackagadget@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oi0-x241.google.com (mail-oi0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 434D58469E; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:49:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hackagadget@gmail.com) Received: by mail-oi0-x241.google.com with SMTP id k190-v6so201968oib.9; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:49:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yx92tdzr0zYpXn6JlaJ5khIGU3gUiksNUeRMeyZaSUI=; b=rLpkVNTncr0s5m3JcX0F2zfDpyYp2Jsn3RQEb3t4bRog08ZIoBqc9uwW4vcDCS8bh4 ubIHWA1dYSGdElFYZMnm2kG9TT7PL02LsE9GdQ3II5Yj+AfMpev6EuYTqfLcht2BxPog WILkuL1ZqzYsh0b62E2O0MJPWGf3EMHQ4DLSpvEC6jq7DVfnjtHX6T6z9auCFsPCVee7 +x53knWDZHKbfziRJ1N27N4Sc+Fev7Qf/PUfQEYGfZL1U2yJz9qZBhQM99/uVX6BrdGX CXWN3qOQqnHo39S40kngltvnM8x7NFmD6WTo8KJf7dJQw8+i6i9o23uP9JOOkpzuIjsz 8b/A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=yx92tdzr0zYpXn6JlaJ5khIGU3gUiksNUeRMeyZaSUI=; b=Pc/F0ATBstF6XIiSWAREs4HjqC0E6xXEBLDZm3INHhxm8ssOOU5LivYY57bdXHCYDM 8K+pk4L5Gi8EasJYs9n76Ax7j4aSLhg1HWIByNn/Vi+GMnDehLqua09LnW8xDri2+9vE 4vVmnV4p7sutFZY9l74JpLH43gzQrtOxavf7WrOVmmbq13xA8OlH+KXtdBGoo7ynRVLC rX7a4L2sbrG4s6p8B5eN5rF9ObA0qsTe0hSIAgySMVE3qoIIpP2Xo07Ow+fDFwzak786 6iAspfrznKB1VcYLnoQCdTA4dbjkR3SejJp57Bv9YKXExHRpbAZReCwENhQVvphJr1vN 7JBw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3e50AoSvXz2RoXMtzTTQm+fI5A2nlRDRIJn3x+VGr7H2LX2WJt ehdmoPYclmkqYpl+bbeeRqS2Y0RFA0AgWa0u8l6w1hkAF0E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKptpeoxaRCQ0Ru6ZmMl3dvQ9dpy5n0Y9/s3K2vCiKNWGUVwUJN0Mj2IgxT7INp90h3ikJ+/CyqiZTdOIdv+pw= X-Received: by 2002:aca:5d43:: with SMTP id r64-v6mr11631016oib.1.1529513344306; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:49:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a9d:1918:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:49:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201806200108.w5K18sIR050132@repo.freebsd.org> <96021.1529475664@kaos.jnpr.net> <17033.1529508519@kaos.jnpr.net> <1529510299.24573.5.camel@freebsd.org> From: Stephen Kiernan Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:49:03 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r335402 - head/sbin/veriexecctl To: cem@freebsd.org Cc: Ian Lepore , "Simon J. Gerraty" , svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.26 X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:49:06 -0000 On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Conrad Meyer wrote: > > Please look at the actual code size and layout of the sha1 support > module and tell me that is a burden for Juniper to maintain in their > downstream tree, rather than just getting angry about the suggestion > we don't introduce novel, insecurity cryptographic designs. > I have no problem removing the SHA1 and RIPEMD implementations. It's a minor change and very little code for others to have to maintain if needed. That was the intention of fingerprint module implementation, to try to make it easy to add/remote different algorithms. It could even potentially be done as a port, if people are keen to having to pre-load a module to get the support (I know that that's a bit of a grey area without a verified loader and secureboot or similar functionality to protect integrity.) I think some of the issue was this code has been looking for eyes to give a good look for over 2 years (even before the review was posted, it was available in my GitHub branch for at least 1 year prior, if not longer.) As for some of the other issues, note my comment in the review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D8554: "Note I have some updates that I have been working on to handle the meta-data store better in SMP environments. So there will be updates to these reviews, hopefully in the near future, time permitting." And I was working on those sets of changes, when work and family didn't steal away time. I was told that some discussion happened at BSDCan this year in such that veriexec should go in as-is so it would be there, which is why the commit happened (given the review was approved to land back in January.) I suppose I should have just kept with my original intention to fix the issues and update the review(s). Hopefully now it will mean it will get the right eyes on it. I don't believe I need to dig up all the e-mail threads and chat logs for IRC where I asked for help and was given pointers to folks to contact and we ended up here. It's a better use of everyone's time to just cool down, back things out, get new reviews updated and provide constructive feedback. So far this experience (I am not pointing at you here) has been a mixed set of constructive comments and outright flaming. The latter of which is never going to help get the right results and could be one of the reasons that a number of folks give up contributing to FreeBSD. -Steve