From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com (mail-wm1-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3877049EC41 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 14:22:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788186161; cv=none; b=JeS6xbVgipTQEswFyTtzTzSFyFjzVwG4qd5TIUuwcRN5CnWeSDruOLiJ9yvyvvVQc78rQ/ivQRdntYqJjVZ0eVoCx7UvNiIW9HJVauxRtusUv8Xgk9fqTbhd+EnUlXvEAqXvuCIpU7swy0/tMef2cYfL3ASdqXDWLWYvGHudBgc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788186161; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ssy/+J48udsvb8s5cNNtStK7Eh2FqnexA8kGVzmIffA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fvB3YouTwvjqTnS15bg0SpwDrBls9MappZ/cA0F9sao+v3g3QP9UJ0dDwXW1667eOeUlCdKSa9ezoAIrpWHyq+YLbYnGB2nmIXzS5arBgGmaJUiIrjkdofFJHjTRFeIgEYqJvTSzKBr5NrIj8NE/jclV37iH8TK4dfMKCsYLdgM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=W4++9lNm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="W4++9lNm" Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49b8eeb3ff2so26292785e9.2 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 07:22:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1788186158; x=1788790958; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=7tISTQ9tiSmJaPWdMAEbXQLoa5N7JlHWWmdz6lYTqvQ=; b=W4++9lNmY7OAvvJjC93HMwoh6is4Hz+LWZJJXR6qpAPqNmWj3nfAN1NhLLSYc+/73L GpuNNsTB0ZZFpYB8fU8LBrNR2TLc2UPX3WnJLyxqpHgc51bx1sbHDqw4SsNvohSkldvZ MC9fUpMkCj+Pj+uKbQpzVyM4m4PX9k+BpNGEMSMfNT+kuu6nmCXG+0YU+noT9rMYvRAn QRmeityfgN/mO0xpp9eHKJUfGwSjIBZA12a4ZRwjT6ainhFq+FrSSnY/EbwTJogA6jWC LYPeZHeTxxE/f0AAzZjWkzJUgOdGh6W6XnL88HanJNu6cdEBUBpUh6gPo9/H6nmXchJc ZcOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1788186158; x=1788790958; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=7tISTQ9tiSmJaPWdMAEbXQLoa5N7JlHWWmdz6lYTqvQ=; b=S1t9Rgak9zioYf6+dfwqeuCeu0rcWHbs71xJm1VakcceWdnQmIKMHVt3/Vg8yqAxfC fE16ACQMS1jdwvrNfS72qPLtoIwLhZFsGTIAiV7GVCsf2JP3N6V8PCgU5a4i6y4i/QZj sHyd58iRWmg1Ak7UdtvBI14OMiS5yOyKQACO03kjOgTDjOcS2st6Wt/+lpgtTEjs2F16 170moZ90Rnb1RFejETi2RlCWyVw3zTNf/7C9p9lqJ02FtU80y3SUHqKA64lOdK6+tj0J 63mtKnQocrY3H27gfmk59Rh3If/8xAtFRAnRbbNnHHvupVVM+rPa26/Kjaqsa5OUdnni O5JA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RonIMfoTUSUrLWe/5uZD29IkVAD5A29B53mZP+DSdC8IMJ47o+Ea29nsUe0jVRgy1yXWB1SZB4858peyXrhc4Q=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++mNxlf/NK4MCaRc0a4Aw35FJgT4iLxpDtbky+DuKPT0ev8bS6/5 ok2lcPhMbX8pVaqOj0sK85mpACicnC5Nwjepo0WQx2Ii+rcPpFArLUWBscc7Vzzxjjc= X-Gm-Gg: AR+sD105lGjWGr0qBeJ+2LoUUHD9NBo3uYdHadOeCaRLjZx4vytN6QOXJ+l4anWNnx1 H9x1T9WAoBkaOhRXVmejWcfj7M+sgo0T1j/A/uX2xKdZPGyzP24J1+2JuUogGeM2eI7+EiYYicr PKeX+QpDfBfcWyhRt+3u+lRn2L+GRw89OTrzpeenAtxwItdkGWpdlclh/yUe75REAYu3W/aA5Gl MTiKeg/hV/VQePC/ovvmtI6kH1v9rBYWQzmk5IP3RmH+j445bcceOjqVVaSph7Pl2lK30ahIpYR XHRikYsS9dbgbZSYUblf5m4kW6Ltf2BdYQPZqAVql9Cl/Culppo02yNySZattliNTJdb7UvuGzB SNK1m6c7j+zncEGNEtBQsFdSEOScFPkJqlrmZW5hBjesWm0qfNbEKSDBcnrANaFlnDqz2dWlh4L NVjAIh7kZ7WxUXDQYCRIm8yKtcGpSmWx+oA72qiJX4YGpizOa2UdG0WLpf2xg3rA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:6091:b0:49c:d60c:74e0 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49cdc44a420mr20771505e9.13.1788186158256; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 07:22:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pathway.suse.cz ([176.114.240.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-49b9266be71sm619531775e9.2.2026.08.31.07.22.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 31 Aug 2026 07:22:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 16:22:35 +0200 From: Petr Mladek To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Kees Cook , Rasmus Villemoes , Sergey Senozhatsky , Steven Rostedt , Tycho Andersen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] vsprintf: Don't leak pointers for %ps without KALLSYMS enabled Message-ID: References: <20260821152614.2202196-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20260821152614.2202196-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20260827091407.yUpoFiuF@linutronix.de> <20260831133021.PtgflU-O@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260831133021.PtgflU-O@linutronix.de> On Mon 2026-08-31 15:30:21, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2026-08-27 11:51:00 [+0200], Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > I think that it is a matter of taste. I could understand that > > "(unknown)" might look more obvious to some people. > > > > I would still prefer the hashed pointer. It make it consistent with > > %p handling. Both print addresses in this case. > > For %p expect a pointer, for %pS you expect a name. > > > The motivation for the hash in %p is that it is slightly more useful > > than a static string, e.g. "(address)" or "(pointer)". The hash allows > > to match the same addresses. It is not 100% reliable but better > > than nothing. > > but is this helpful? > > > Also the hash makes it more obvious the connection with "no_hash_pointer" > > option. > > Assuming you know about the no_hash_pointer. And then you get a > randomized pointer. Enabling kallsym would be a _bigger_ help than > rebooting with no_hash_pointer. > > > IMHO, the only drawback is that people might confuse the hash with > > a real value. But it is easier on 64-bit systems because the higher > > 32-bits are zeros. > > That, too. Do you continue to insist on this hashed pointer output here? I do not insist on it. IMHO, this does not have a good solution. I wish we got feedback from more people. Let's give it few more days. The merge window has just ended. People might have more time to go through pending mails. Best Regards, Petr