Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Apr 2021 19:08:05 +0200 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 186/190] Revert "virt: vbox: Only copy_from_user the request-header once" |
| |
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 06:59:58PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 06:51:24PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On 4/21/21 3:01 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > This reverts commit bd23a7269834dc7c1f93e83535d16ebc44b75eba. > > > > > > Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in "bad > > > faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review "known > > > malicious" changes. The result of these submissions can be found in a > > > paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy > > > entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing > > > Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu (University > > > of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota). > > > > > > Because of this, all submissions from this group must be reverted from > > > the kernel tree and will need to be re-reviewed again to determine if > > > they actually are a valid fix. Until that work is complete, remove this > > > change to ensure that no problems are being introduced into the > > > codebase. > > > > > > Cc: Wenwen Wang <wang6495@umn.edu> > > > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > > > > Ugh what a mess (the whole umn.edu thing). > > > > I still remember reviewing this patch during its original submission > > and I've reviewed it again this morning when you just send it out. > > > > And now after letting it sit for a bit I've reviewed it a third time > > and it seems to do what it says on the label / in the original commit > > msg; and if fixes a real, potentially security, issue. > > > > I'm not sure what the process is for "good" patches in the set > > which you are reverting. I would prefer for this patch to be dropped > > from the set of reveert. But I can also submit a revert of the revert(?) > > once this set of reverts has been merged. > > If you have reviewed it, and think it should stay, I will drop the > revert from my patch series. Other maintainers/reviewers have asked the > same thing for their patches, which is fine. > > Anything that I do end up reverting, that was not reviewed, will be > again reviewed by me and others to determine if it is "safe" to come > back in at a later point in time. > > So thanks for the review, I'll drop this one.
Now dropped, thanks for the review.
greg k-h
| |