Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: samsung: Suppress unbinding to prevent theoretical attacks

2016-05-27 Thread Krzysztof Kozlowski
On 05/26/2016 11:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski > wrote: > >> Although unbinding a pinctrl driver requires root privileges but it >> still might be used theoretically in certain attacks (by triggering NULL >> pointer exception or memory corrupti

Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: samsung: Suppress unbinding to prevent theoretical attacks

2016-05-26 Thread Linus Walleij
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Although unbinding a pinctrl driver requires root privileges but it > still might be used theoretically in certain attacks (by triggering NULL > pointer exception or memory corruption). Patch applied with Javier's review tag. I suspe

Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: samsung: Suppress unbinding to prevent theoretical attacks

2016-05-20 Thread Javier Martinez Canillas
Hello Krzysztof, On 05/17/2016 02:02 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Although unbinding a pinctrl driver requires root privileges but it > still might be used theoretically in certain attacks (by triggering NULL > pointer exception or memory corruption). > > Samsung pincontrol drivers are essent

[PATCH] pinctrl: samsung: Suppress unbinding to prevent theoretical attacks

2016-05-16 Thread Krzysztof Kozlowski
Although unbinding a pinctrl driver requires root privileges but it still might be used theoretically in certain attacks (by triggering NULL pointer exception or memory corruption). Samsung pincontrol drivers are essential for system operation so their removal is not expected. They do not implemen