Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:10 PM, James Morris wrote: > > David Howells (7): > Handle leap seconds in mktime64() This one is completely wrong. Leap seconds are inserted *at* the minute, not at the secodn before the minute. So this code: + /* Handle leap seconds

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:56 AM, John Stultz wrote: > > So leap-seconds are inserted at the minute, but the kernel represents > it as repeating the last second of the day. Maybe there is some reason why you want to do that, but at least from a mktime64() standpoint, it's

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:10 PM, James Morris wrote: >> >> David Howells (7): >> Handle leap seconds in mktime64() > > This one is completely wrong. > > Leap seconds are inserted

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > The fact that people add extra code to make things extra wrong is > annoying. Side note: the key handling extra checks seem pretty pointless too. There's no reason to have those "some time formats allow

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So there is no way in hell I am pulling this. > Sorry for the confusion. Please pull the first patch from here: The following changes since commit 73796d8bf27372e26c2b79881947304c14c2d353: Merge

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 2:37 PM, David Howells wrote: > > Except that it has been argued that they have to be there or someone can use > dates that contribute to the signature to fake a signed content. Admittedly > being able to have a seconds=60 value in somewhere that

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

Linus Torvalds wrote: > > David Howells (7): > > Handle leap seconds in mktime64() > > This one is completely wrong. > > Leap seconds are inserted *at* the minute, not at the secodn before the > minute. > > So this code: > > + /* Handle leap

Re: [GIT PULL] Keys fixes

Linus Torvalds wrote: > Side note: the key handling extra checks seem pretty pointless too. Except that it has been argued that they have to be there or someone can use dates that contribute to the signature to fake a signed content. Admittedly being able to have

[GIT PULL] Keys fixes

Please pull these fixes for the keys subsystem, including a fix for CVE-2015-7550. The following changes since commit 73796d8bf27372e26c2b79881947304c14c2d353: Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net (2015-12-17 14:05:22 -0800) are available in the git repository at: