From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Wed Jun 20 17:54:20 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 52C8A10011CB; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 17:54:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com (mail-it0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) (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 CBE366A97B; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 17:54:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id k17-v6so166082ita.0; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cotO2IyVsn+M1/xcGWjf2TyAg17vuUaKCbJDuSbxNFw=; b=jcheoo6H2tiU1cCuPbI6RKA2xuiEnRjBp5KNmNK6b/YazB9kW0EnFpjMmYp2dhyZIP 2q/1wPLMyLkzduDfXiMrd1dRG7ULtk2T8bkTAc4CP5OBlDRNThK55lUNleEbGK/zGviW XfLQPwhLdJV18rL+tQZwS1GyjXZFgk6YDiTFYBZakSaM9HWPOcnLKb1m46Skuqgkw93W Os/04C7oLyOg6V/LfTP7KruwcVMMt3X5Qnp48LpLHI42K2slDPJ7h/rOM+HWzu7xlGrF 486QYG4xzqb+qTjl4dQZjVxIC17odwlxbP+/tktW8oGgQUmxLqxdtScj/3j7In+PIWO5 FSLw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1kqXk6KHCKTFZ9smemF6pOwwqe0lcDNhA0+Zh2ccsQADPPUxbx oqgFzgtHrZwypWElGmRXJnVLvcEU X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIyuiY1Hk8SlNabjYoIfeH3Zpu42MZFGNLT/ErozBkAF8O9NfE1GB7tKGciV7j2EKdYtyk6mg== X-Received: by 2002:a24:c246:: with SMTP id i67-v6mr2549721itg.45.1529517258545; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-f48.google.com (mail-it0-f48.google.com. [209.85.214.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e202-v6sm1313417ioe.0.2018.06.20.10.54.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-f48.google.com with SMTP id 188-v6so840361ita.5; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a24:ed4a:: with SMTP id r71-v6mr2394866ith.53.1529517258283; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: cem@freebsd.org Received: by 2002:a02:5995:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201806200108.w5K18sIR050132@repo.freebsd.org> <96021.1529475664@kaos.jnpr.net> From: Conrad Meyer Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:54:17 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r335402 - head/sbin/veriexecctl To: "Simon J. Gerraty" Cc: src-committers , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 17:54:20 -0000 Hi Simon, Jonathan points out some of my comments were more acerbic than necessary. I apologize for that. I'd like to try to rephrase them in a more clear way. On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Conrad Meyer wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Simon J. Gerraty wrot= e: >> As I mentioned in my talk at BSDCan, > > (FWIW, I was not at your talk, and it is not a justification for bad > design or implementation anyway.) I said before and I'll repeat: I think this design is pretty close to a reasonable security feature. I think it currently has a number of serious =E2=80=94 but addressable =E2=80=94 flaws, some of which I have tri= ed to outline. > ... > Why is this either necessary or helpful to be in the FreeBSD tree > as-is? I don't think it is, and you should revert it. Please. I > don't know if there's a maintainer timeout on this kind of thing, but, > you are forewarned. Sorry, this was a poor choice of words. I mean to say something like: I asked for a revert in an earlier email, and this reply did not address the primary reason for the revert, so I am still asking for a revert. I can do it myself, but I would like to give the committer the opportunity to do it themselves. (In private, Stephen has let me know he will do so when he gets back to his FreeBSD machines, so there's no need for that anyway.) All the best, Conrad