[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/7] sysfs/cpu: Add "Unknown" vulnerability state
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 06:49:15PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> There is a lot of variation in the Arm ecosystem. Because of this,
> there exist possible cases where the kernel cannot authoritatively
> determine if a machine is vulnerable.

Really? Why not? What keeps you from "knowing" this? Can't the
developer of the chip tell you?

> Rather than guess the vulnerability status in cases where
> the mitigation is disabled or the firmware isn't responding
> correctly, we need to display an "Unknown" state.

Shouldn't "Unknown" really be the same thing as "Vulnerable"? A user
should treat it the same way, "Unknown" makes it feel like "maybe I can
just ignore this and hope I really am safe", which is not a good idea at


greg k-h

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-03 10:40    [W:0.091 / U:2.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site